From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9BAE06B005C for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 19:16:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id j3so2968937tid.8 for ; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:16:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:15:32 +0900 From: MinChan Kim Subject: Re: Question: Is zone->prev_prirotiy used ? Message-ID: <20090122001532.GC17969@barrios-desktop> References: <20090121155219.8b870167.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090121071718.GA17969@barrios-desktop> <20090123084500.421C.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090122090657.7c1d7b56.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090122090657.7c1d7b56.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , riel@redhat.com List-ID: On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 09:06:57AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:54:07 +0900 (JST) > KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 03:52:19PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > > Just a question. > > > > > > > > In vmscan.c, zone->prev_priority doesn't seem to be used. > > > > > > > > Is it for what, now ? > > > > > > It's the purpose of reclaiming mapped pages before split-lru. > > > Now, get_scan_ratio can do it. > > > I think it is a meaningless variable. > > > How about Kosaki and Rik ? > > > > Right. > > I thought this variable can use for future enhancement. > > then I didn't removed. > > > example ? > > > Kamezawa-san, does its variable prevent your development? > > if so, I don't oppose removing. > > > > Hmm, I tried to fix/clean up hierarchical-memory-reclaim + split-LRU and > wondered where prev_priority should be recorded (hierarchy root or local or..) > and found prev_priority is not used. > > IMHO, LRU management is too complex to keep unnecessary code maintained just > because it may be used in future. I personally like to rewrite better new code > rather than reuse old ruins. I agree. It's too complicated. I think it would be better to remove it. We can insert it again when we will really need it. > But I'm not in hurry. I just wanted to confirm. > > BTW, I noticed mem_cgroup_calc_mapped_ratio() is not used, either ;) > > Thanks, > -Kame -- Kinds Regards, MinChan Kim -- 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