From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <46EED747.8090907@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:36:39 -0400 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 5/14] Reclaim Scalability: Use an indexed array for LRU variables References: <20070914205359.6536.98017.sendpatchset@localhost> <20070914205431.6536.43754.sendpatchset@localhost> <46EECE5C.3070801@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <46EECE5C.3070801@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mel@csn.ul.ie, clameter@sgi.com, andrea@suse.de, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, eric.whitney@hp.com, npiggin@suse.de List-ID: Balbir Singh wrote: > I wonder if it makes sense to have an array of the form > > struct reclaim_lists { > struct list_head list[NR_LRU_LISTS]; > unsigned long nr_scan[NR_LRU_LISTS]; > reclaim_function_t list_reclaim_function[NR_LRU_LISTS]; > } > > where reclaim_function is an array of reclaim functions for each list > (in our case shrink_active_list/shrink_inactive_list). I am not convinced, since that does not give us any way to balance between the calls made to each function... -- Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country the best in the world, and those who believe it already is. Each group calls the other unpatriotic. -- 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