From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:38:20 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] Per zone counter functionality Message-Id: <20060609103820.a8cfc7b4.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20060608230239.25121.83503.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <20060608230244.25121.76440.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <20060608210045.62129826.akpm@osdl.org> <20060609100627.5ff14228.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hugh@veritas.com, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, linux-mm@kvack.org, ak@suse.de, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com List-ID: On Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:18:23 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > There's no need for an atomic op - at the most the architecture would need > > local_irq_disable() protection, and that's only if it doesn't have an > > atomic-wrt-this-cpu add instruction. > > So I can drop the VM_STATS() definitions? I _think_ so. But a bit of a review of the existing atomic ops for the major architectures wouldn't hurt. > > > Right thought about that one as well. Can we stablize this first before I > > > do another big reorg? > > > > That's unfortunate patch ordering. Do it (much) later I guess. > > Well there are a couple of trailing issues that would have to be resolved > before that happens. I have another patchset here that does something more > to the remaining counters. It's a relatively minor issue - we can do this little cleanup much later on. -- 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