From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <46296ACD.3020402@google.com> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:37:17 -0700 From: Ethan Solomita MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback References: <20070116054743.15358.77287.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <45C2960B.9070907@google.com> <46019F67.3010300@google.com> <4626CEDA.7050608@google.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: akpm@osdl.org, Paul Menage , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nick Piggin , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Paul Jackson , Dave Chinner , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki List-ID: Christoph Lameter wrote: > Hmmmm.... Sorry. I got distracted and I have sent them to Kame-san who was > interested in working on them. > > I have placed the most recent version at > http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/christoph/cpuset_dirty > Hi Christoph -- a few comments on the patches: cpuset_write_dirty_map.htm In __set_page_dirty_nobuffers() you always call cpuset_update_dirty_nodes() but in __set_page_dirty_buffers() you call it only if page->mapping is still set after locking. Is there a reason for the difference? Also a question not about your patch: why do those functions call __mark_inode_dirty() even if the dirty page has been truncated and mapping == NULL? cpuset_write_throttle.htm I noticed that several lines have leading spaces. I didn't check if other patches have the problem too. In get_dirty_limits(), when cpusets are configd you don't subtract highmen the same way that is done without cpusets. Is this intentional? It seems that dirty_exceeded is still a global punishment across cpusets. Should it be addressed? -- Ethan -- 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