From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com (mail-pb0-f46.google.com [209.85.160.46]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70F796B0031 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 02:42:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id un4so1802779pbc.5 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 23:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from psmtp.com ([74.125.245.103]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id it5si13984373pbc.305.2013.10.28.23.42.04 for ; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 23:42:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D43F3EE0C2 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:42:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EC5545DE3E for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:42:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52BD245DE54 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:42:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 282E01DB804B for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:42:02 +0900 (JST) Received: from m1001.s.css.fujitsu.com (m1001.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.139]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838DC1DB804F for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 15:42:01 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <526F58B5.7020503@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 02:41:57 -0400 From: KOSAKI Motohiro MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: cma: free cma page to buddy instead of being cpu hot page References: <1382960569-6564-1-git-send-email-zhang.mingjun@linaro.org> <20131029045430.GE17038@bbox> In-Reply-To: <20131029045430.GE17038@bbox> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: minchan@kernel.org, zhang.mingjun@linaro.org Cc: m.szyprowski@samsung.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de, haojian.zhuang@linaro.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, troy.zhangmingjun@linaro.org > The concern is likely/unlikely usage is proper in this code peice. > If we don't use memory isolation, the code path is used for only > MIGRATE_RESERVE which is very rare allocation in normal workload. > > Even, in memory isolation environement, I'm not sure how many > CMA/HOTPLUG is used compared to normal alloc/free. > So, I think below is more proper? > > if (unlikely(migratetype >= MIGRATE_PCPTYPES)) { > if (is_migrate_isolate(migratetype) || is_migrate_cma(migratetype)) > > I know it's an another topic but I'd like to disucss it in this time because > we will forget such trivial thing later, again. I completely agree with this. -- 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