From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] vmscan: Remove unnecessary temporary variables in shrink_zone() Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 11:51:27 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <20100528114003.7E1B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20100416230332.GH20640@cmpxchg.org> <20100526112143.GM29038@csn.ul.ie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Johannes Weiner , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Chris Mason , Dave Chinner , Andi Kleen To: Mel Gorman Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100526112143.GM29038@csn.ul.ie> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org > On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 01:03:32AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:51:26AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > Two variables are declared that are unnecessary in shrink_zone() as they > > > > already exist int the scan_control. Remove them > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman > > > > > > ok. > > > Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > > > > You confuse me, you added the local variables yourself in 01dbe5c9 > > for performance reasons. Doesn't that still hold? > > To avoid a potential regression, I've dropped the patch. I'm ok either. Commit 01dbe5c9 issue was only observed on ia64. so it's not important. But at making 01dbe5c9 time, I didn't realized this stack overflow issue. So, I thought "Oh, It's no risk. should go!". but if stack reducing is important, I'm ok to drop this one. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org