Re: [PATCH 01/15] mm: poison struct page for ptlock

[Ingo Molnar]

* Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 01:37:19PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 
> > > spinlock in struct page, and the size of the spinlock varies a lot according
> > > to config.  The only >wordsize version we really care about is
> > > CONFIG_PREEMPT, NR_CPUS >= 4.  (which distros don't ship...)
> > 
> > Suse, Debian and Redhat ship such kernels.
> 
> No.  SuSE and Redhat have always been smart enough to avoid 
> CONFIG_PREEMPT like the plague, and even Debian finally noticed this a 
> few month ago.

while you are right about CONFIG_PREEMPT, there is some movement in this 
area: CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is now turned on in Fedora kernels, and 
PREEMPT_BKL is turned on for SMP kernels.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/