From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 421D26B004A for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2010 23:15:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.226]) by e36.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o973AumW019573 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2010 21:10:56 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay01.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o973F3qi145306 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2010 21:15:03 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o973F2V8009099 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 2010 21:15:03 -0600 Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 08:44:59 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Subject: Re: [RFC] Restrict size of page_cgroup->flags Message-ID: <20101007031459.GL4195@balbir.in.ibm.com> Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20101006142314.GG4195@balbir.in.ibm.com> <20101007095458.a992969e.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101007095458.a992969e.nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Daisuke Nishimura Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-ID: * nishimura@mxp.nes.nec.co.jp [2010-10-07 09:54:58]: > On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 19:53:14 +0530 > Balbir Singh wrote: > > > I propose restricting page_cgroup.flags to 16 bits. The patch for the > > same is below. Comments? > > > > > > Restrict the bits usage in page_cgroup.flags > > > > From: Balbir Singh > > > > Restricting the flags helps control growth of the flags unbound. > > Restriciting it to 16 bits gives us the possibility of merging > > cgroup id with flags (atomicity permitting) and saving a whole > > long word in page_cgroup > > > I agree that reducing the size of page_cgroup would be good and important. > But, wouldn't it be better to remove ->page, if possible ? > Without the page pointer, how do we go from pc to page for reclaim? -- Three Cheers, Balbir -- 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