From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 10F036B003D for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:26:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n2N1KK7X010973 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:20:21 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BEBF45DE52 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:20:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.95]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3243045DE51 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:20:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146F2E08009 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:20:20 +0900 (JST) Received: from m105.s.css.fujitsu.com (m105.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.105]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D431DB8013 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:20:19 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix vmscan to take care of nodemask In-Reply-To: <20090323101348.07b9c761.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20090323100356.e980d266.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090323101348.07b9c761.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20090323101632.69E7.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 10:20:18 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , mel@csn.ul.ie, riel@redhat.com, "akpm@linux-foundation.org" List-ID: > Kosaki pointed out it's not necessary to initialize struct member value by NULL. > Remvoed it. > > Regards, > -Kame > == > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > > try_to_free_pages() scans zonelist but don't take care of nodemask which is > given to alloc_pages_nodemask(). This makes try_to_free_pages() less effective. Yes, ignore nodemask make unnecessary reclaim. it decrease try_to_free_pages() performance. Note: currently, try_to_free_pages() stop to process reclaim after 32 pages reclaimed. then, non intentional node scanning can cause large performance degression. > > Changelog: v1 -> v2 > - removed unnecessary nodemask=NULL initialization. > > Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki thanks. Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro -- 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