Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 04:19 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > >>You don't want to do that for all architectures, as I said earlier. >>eg. i386 can concurrently set the dirty bit with the MMU (which won't >>honour the lock). >> >>So you then need an atomic lock, atomic pte operations, and atomic >>unlock where previously you had only the atomic pte operation. This is >>disastrous for performance. > > > Of course, but I was answering to David about sparc64 which uses > software TLB load :) > Oh sorry, I completely misunderstood what you said... and the context in which you said it :P - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Thu Mar 3 02:44:47 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:36 EST