From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754933AbcBWSlJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:41:09 -0500 Received: from gum.cmpxchg.org ([85.214.110.215]:59880 "EHLO gum.cmpxchg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753250AbcBWSlH (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:41:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:40:58 -0800 From: Johannes Weiner To: Mel Gorman Cc: Linux-MM , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/27] mm, vmscan: Move lru_lock to the node Message-ID: <20160223184058.GD13816@cmpxchg.org> References: <1456239890-20737-1-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net> <1456239890-20737-5-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1456239890-20737-5-git-send-email-mgorman@techsingularity.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 03:04:27PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote: > Node-based reclaim requires node-based LRUs and locking. This is a > preparation patch that just moves the lru_lock to the node so later patches > are easier to review. It is a mechanical change but note this patch makes > contention worse because the LRU lock is hotter and direct reclaim and kswapd > can contend on the same lock even when reclaiming from different zones. > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman Reviewing mechanical patches like these is error prone, but nothing obviously broken stands out to me here. Acked-by: Johannes Weiner