Re: [PATCH] Fix dirty page accounting in redirty_page_for_writepage()

Ingo Molnar
2009-04-30T16:04:00Z

* Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote:

> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1128
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1132
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1134
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1138
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1139
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1145 VM stats
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1160 NFS stats
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1161 Genhd stats
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch/1164 SRCU

The new percpu APIs could be used in most of these places already,
straight away. This is a really good TODO list for places to
enhance.

Then a second set of patches could convert percpu_add() / etc. uses
to __percpu_add() ... but that should be done by those architectures
that need it (and to the extent they need it), because it's not
really testable on x86.

I dont really like the PER_CPU / CPU_INC etc. type of all-capitals
APIs you introduced in the patches above:

+ __CPU_INC(bt->sequence);
+ CPU_FREE(bt->sequence);

was there any strong reason to go outside the well-established
percpu_* name space and call these primitives as if they were
macros?

Ingo