[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: COPY_DELAY could perform worse than COPY_NONE

From: Richard Braun
Subject: Re: COPY_DELAY could perform worse than COPY_NONE
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 14:23:56 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 01:55:42AM +0200, Sergio López wrote:
> Nowadays, the copy strategy is decided per-object, but I think the
> desired type of access to an object should also be considered. For
> instance, the operation generated by vm_copy should almost always use
> COPY_NONE, while vm_map, when doing things such as providing a private
> map, should use COPY_DELAY.

I really don't see why vm_copy() should use COPY_NONE. Could you explain
it briefly (sorry if I'm asking about something you may already have
described, but I feel it would be better with a clear, simple,
centralized explanation).

Richard Braun

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]