Re: anon_vma RFC2

[Rik van Riel]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> So let's make it clear: if we have an object-based reverse mapping, it 
> should cover all reasonable cases, and in particular, it should NOT have 
> rare fallbacks to code that thus never gets any real testing.

Absolutely agreed.  And with Rajesh's code it should be possible
to get object-based rmap right, not vulnerable to the scalability
issues demonstrated by Ingo's test programs.

Whether we go with mm-based or vma-based, I don't particularly
care either.  As long as the code is nice...

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan

-
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/