Re: cache-pipe-buf-page-address-for-non-highmem-arch.patch

2007-05-02 Thread Ken Chen
On 5/1/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Fair enough, it is a bit of an ugly thing. And I see no measurements there on what the overall speedup was for any workload. Ken, which memory model was in use? sparsemem? discontigmem with config_numa on. - To unsubscribe from this list:

Re: cache-pipe-buf-page-address-for-non-highmem-arch.patch

2007-05-02 Thread Ken Chen
On 5/1/07, Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fair enough, it is a bit of an ugly thing. And I see no measurements there on what the overall speedup was for any workload. Ken, which memory model was in use? sparsemem? discontigmem with config_numa on. - To unsubscribe from this list:

cache-pipe-buf-page-address-for-non-highmem-arch.patch

2007-05-01 Thread Christoph Hellwig
> cache-pipe-buf-page-address-for-non-highmem-arch.patch I still don't like this one at all. If page_address on x86_64 is too slow we should fix the root cause. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PR

cache-pipe-buf-page-address-for-non-highmem-arch.patch

2007-05-01 Thread Christoph Hellwig
cache-pipe-buf-page-address-for-non-highmem-arch.patch I still don't like this one at all. If page_address on x86_64 is too slow we should fix the root cause. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo