* [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check
@ 2010-03-31 14:10 Bob Liu
2010-03-31 14:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bob Liu @ 2010-03-31 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm; +Cc: linux-mm, kosaki.motohiro, Bob Liu
From: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
Whether mode is ISOLATE_BOTH or not, we should compare
page_is_file_cache with argument file.
And there is no more need not when checking the active state.
Signed-off-by: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 9 ++-------
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index e0e5f15..34d7e3d 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -862,15 +862,10 @@ int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int mode, int file)
if (!PageLRU(page))
return ret;
- /*
- * When checking the active state, we need to be sure we are
- * dealing with comparible boolean values. Take the logical not
- * of each.
- */
- if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (!PageActive(page) != !mode))
+ if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (PageActive(page) != mode))
return ret;
- if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
+ if (page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
return ret;
/*
--
1.5.6.3
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check
2010-03-31 14:10 [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check Bob Liu
@ 2010-03-31 14:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-01 1:30 ` Bob Liu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: KOSAKI Motohiro @ 2010-03-31 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bob Liu; +Cc: akpm, linux-mm
2010/3/31 Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>:
> From: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
>
> Whether mode is ISOLATE_BOTH or not, we should compare
> page_is_file_cache with argument file.
>
> And there is no more need not when checking the active state.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 9 ++-------
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index e0e5f15..34d7e3d 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -862,15 +862,10 @@ int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int mode, int file)
> if (!PageLRU(page))
> return ret;
>
> - /*
> - * When checking the active state, we need to be sure we are
> - * dealing with comparible boolean values. Take the logical not
> - * of each.
> - */
> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (!PageActive(page) != !mode))
> + if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (PageActive(page) != mode))
> return ret;
no. please read the comment.
> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
> + if (page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
> return ret;
no. please consider lumpy reclaim.
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check
2010-03-31 14:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
@ 2010-04-01 1:30 ` Bob Liu
2010-04-01 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bob Liu @ 2010-04-01 1:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: KOSAKI Motohiro; +Cc: akpm, linux-mm
On 3/31/10, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 2010/3/31 Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>:
>> From: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
>>
>> Whether mode is ISOLATE_BOTH or not, we should compare
>> page_is_file_cache with argument file.
>>
>> And there is no more need not when checking the active state.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> mm/vmscan.c | 9 ++-------
>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>> index e0e5f15..34d7e3d 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>> @@ -862,15 +862,10 @@ int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int mode,
>> int file)
>> if (!PageLRU(page))
>> return ret;
>>
>> - /*
>> - * When checking the active state, we need to be sure we are
>> - * dealing with comparible boolean values. Take the logical not
>> - * of each.
>> - */
>> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (!PageActive(page) != !mode))
>> + if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (PageActive(page) != mode))
>> return ret;
>
> no. please read the comment.
>
Hm,. I have read it, but still miss it :-).
PageActive(page) will return an int 0 or 1, mode is also int 0 or 1(
already != ISOLATE_BOTH).
There are comparible and why must to be sure to boolean values?
>> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
>> + if (page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
>> return ret;
>
> no. please consider lumpy reclaim.
>
During lumpy reclaim mode is ISOLATE_BOTH, that case we don't check
page_is_file_cache() ? Would you please explain it a little more ,i
am still unclear about it.
Thanks a lot.
--
Regards,
--Bob
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check
2010-04-01 1:30 ` Bob Liu
@ 2010-04-01 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-01 13:42 ` Bob Liu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: KOSAKI Motohiro @ 2010-04-01 1:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bob Liu; +Cc: kosaki.motohiro, akpm, linux-mm
> >> @@ -862,15 +862,10 @@ int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int mode,
> >> int file)
> >> if (!PageLRU(page))
> >> return ret;
> >>
> >> - /*
> >> - * When checking the active state, we need to be sure we are
> >> - * dealing with comparible boolean values. Take the logical not
> >> - * of each.
> >> - */
> >> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (!PageActive(page) != !mode))
> >> + if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (PageActive(page) != mode))
> >> return ret;
> >
> > no. please read the comment.
> >
>
> Hm,. I have read it, but still miss it :-).
> PageActive(page) will return an int 0 or 1, mode is also int 0 or 1(
> already != ISOLATE_BOTH).
> There are comparible and why must to be sure to boolean values?
hm, ok. you are right.
please resend this part as individual patch.
> >> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
> >> + if (page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
> >> return ret;
> >
> > no. please consider lumpy reclaim.
>
> During lumpy reclaim mode is ISOLATE_BOTH, that case we don't check
> page_is_file_cache() ? Would you please explain it a little more ,i
> am still unclear about it.
> Thanks a lot.
ISOLATE_BOTH is for to help allocate high order memory. then,
it ignore both PageActive() and page_is_file_cache(). otherwise,
we fail to allocate high order memory.
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check
2010-04-01 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
@ 2010-04-01 13:42 ` Bob Liu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bob Liu @ 2010-04-01 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: KOSAKI Motohiro; +Cc: akpm, linux-mm
On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:39 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro
<kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> >> @@ -862,15 +862,10 @@ int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int mode,
>> >> int file)
>> >> if (!PageLRU(page))
>> >> return ret;
>> >>
>> >> - /*
>> >> - * When checking the active state, we need to be sure we are
>> >> - * dealing with comparible boolean values. Take the logical not
>> >> - * of each.
>> >> - */
>> >> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (!PageActive(page) != !mode))
>> >> + if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && (PageActive(page) != mode))
>> >> return ret;
>> >
>> > no. please read the comment.
>> >
>>
>> Hm,. I have read it, but still miss it :-).
>> PageActive(page) will return an int 0 or 1, mode is also int 0 or 1(
>> already != ISOLATE_BOTH).
>> There are comparible and why must to be sure to boolean values?
>
> hm, ok. you are right.
> please resend this part as individual patch.
>
I have resent this part :-).
>
>> >> - if (mode != ISOLATE_BOTH && page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
>> >> + if (page_is_file_cache(page) != file)
>> >> return ret;
>> >
>> > no. please consider lumpy reclaim.
>>
>> During lumpy reclaim mode is ISOLATE_BOTH, that case we don't check
>> page_is_file_cache() ? Would you please explain it a little more ,i
>> am still unclear about it.
>> Thanks a lot.
>
> ISOLATE_BOTH is for to help allocate high order memory. then,
> it ignore both PageActive() and page_is_file_cache(). otherwise,
> we fail to allocate high order memory.
>
I got it, thanks.
And I have resent a patch collected ISOLATE_BOTH check.
--
Regards,
--Bob
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-04-01 13:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-03-31 14:10 [PATCH] __isolate_lru_page: skip unneeded mode check Bob Liu
2010-03-31 14:17 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-01 1:30 ` Bob Liu
2010-04-01 1:39 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-04-01 13:42 ` Bob Liu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).