From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:53:26 -0500 From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: why do we call clear_active_flags in shrink_inactive_list ? Message-ID: <20080102185326.66a3a883@bree.surriel.com> In-Reply-To: <44c63dc40712292332s4a2e7e4aief37a2dbdd03fc21@mail.gmail.com> References: <44c63dc40712292332s4a2e7e4aief37a2dbdd03fc21@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: minchan Kim Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 16:32:42 +0900 "minchan Kim" wrote: > In 2.6.23's shrink_inactive_list function, why do we have to call > clear_active_flags after isolate_lru_pages call ? > IMHO, If it call isolate_lru_pages with "zone->inactive_list", It can > be sure that it is not PG_active. If we call isolate_lru_pages with mode = ISOLATE_BOTH, then it can return both active and inactive pages and the calling function has to be able to deal with both kinds of pages. ISOLATE_BOTH is used when the kernel is trying to defragment memory, for larger physically contiguous allocations. -- All rights reversed. -- 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