From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Lumpy Reclaim V3
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:14:30 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702281008330.21257@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <96f80944962593738d72a803797dbddc@kernel>
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> +static int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int active)
> +{
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (PageLRU(page) && (PageActive(page) == active)) {
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + if (likely(get_page_unless_zero(page))) {
> + /*
> + * Be careful not to clear PageLRU until after we're
> + * sure the page is not being freed elsewhere -- the
> + * page release code relies on it.
> + */
> + ClearPageLRU(page);
> + ret = 0;
Is that really necessary? PageLRU is clear when a page is freed right?
And clearing PageLRU requires the zone->lru_lock since we have to move it
off the LRU.
> - ClearPageLRU(page);
> - target = dst;
> + active = PageActive(page);
Why are we saving the active state? Page cannot be moved between LRUs
while we hold the lru lock anyways.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-28 18:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-27 19:33 [PATCH 0/5] Lumpy Reclaim V4 Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-27 19:34 ` [PATCH 1/5] Lumpy Reclaim V3 Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-28 18:14 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2007-03-02 15:45 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-27 19:34 ` [PATCH 2/5] lumpy: isolate_lru_pages wants to specifically take active or inactive pages Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-28 18:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-03-02 15:57 ` Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-27 19:35 ` [PATCH 3/5] lumpy: ensure that we compare PageActive and active safely Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-27 19:35 ` [PATCH 4/5] lumpy: update commentry on subtle comparisons and rounding assumptions Andy Whitcroft
2007-02-27 19:36 ` [PATCH 5/5] lumpy: only check for valid pages when holes are present Andy Whitcroft
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0702281008330.21257@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).