> I though about both ways yesterday, and in the end, I prefer Nick stuff, > at least for now. It gives us also more flexibility to change gory > implementation details in the future. I still have to run it through a > bit of torture testing though.
They're really solving different problems. My code is just aimed at getting x86-64 fork/exec/etc. as fast as before 4level again (currently they are significantly slower because they have to walk a lot more page tables) The problem is that the index based approach (I think you have to use indexes for this, pointers get very messy) probably does not fit very well into Nick's complex macros. Nick's macros are essentially just code transformations with some micro optimizations. That's not bad, but it won't give you the big speedups the lazy walking approach will give. And to be honest we only have about 6 or 7 of these walkers in the whole kernel. And 90% of them are in memory.c While doing 4level I think I changed all of them around several times and it wasn't that big an issue. So it's not that we have a big pressing problem here... -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
