Re: [PATCH 0/5] Volatile Ranges (v12) & LSF-MM discussion fodder
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Tue Apr 01 2014 - 17:37:42 EST
On 04/01/2014 02:21 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Either way, optimistic volatile pointers are nowhere near as
> transparent to the application as the above description suggests,
> which makes this usecase not very interesting, IMO.
... however, I think you're still derating the value way too much. The
case of user space doing elastic memory management is more and more
common, and for a lot of those applications it is perfectly reasonable
to either not do system calls or to have to devolatilize first.
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/