Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:14:34 -0500
From:      Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>
To:        Alan Cox <alc@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r233097 - head/sys/amd64/amd64
Message-ID:  <A64E77A8-291B-4DD9-9271-015DE8069F77@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <201203172204.q2HM4xBH088986@svn.freebsd.org>
References:  <201203172204.q2HM4xBH088986@svn.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mar 17, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Alan Cox wrote:

> Author: alc
> Date: Sat Mar 17 22:04:58 2012
> New Revision: 233097
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/233097
>
> Log:
>  With the changes over the past year to how accesses to the page's  
> dirty
>  field are synchronized, there is no need for pmap_protect() to  
> acquire
>  the page queues lock unless it is going to access the pv lists.
>
>  Reviewed by:	kib

Under what circumstances does the page queue lock actually have to be  
held? It looks like from this that I can remove the page queue lock  
from the PPC/AIM pmap_protect() completely, but I don't have a good  
sense of it.
-Nathan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A64E77A8-291B-4DD9-9271-015DE8069F77>