From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5798D0039 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 01:10:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (unknown [10.0.50.71]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B39DD3EE0C5 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:10:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from smail (m1 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D0E45DE5D for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:10:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.91]) by m1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6D045DE58 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:10:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AC1CE38003 for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:10:38 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.240.81.146]) by s1.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32C611DB804A for ; Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:10:38 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v3]mm: batch activate_page() to reduce lock contention In-Reply-To: References: <20110308134633.7EBF.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20110308150937.7EC5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:10:37 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Minchan Kim Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Shaohua Li , Andrew Morton , linux-mm , Andi Kleen , Rik van Riel , mel , Johannes Weiner > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 1:47 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro > wrote: > >> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > >> > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pagevec, activate_page_pvecs); > >> > > >> > Why do we have to handle SMP and !SMP? > >> > We have been not separated in case of pagevec using in swap.c. > >> > If you have a special reason, please write it down. > >> this is to reduce memory footprint as suggested by akpm. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Shaohua > > > > Hi Shaouhua, > > > > I agree with you. But, please please avoid full quote. I don't think > > it is so much difficult work. ;-) > > I didn't want to add new comment in the code but want to know why we > have to care of activate_page_pvecs specially. I think it's not a > matter of difficult work or easy work. If new thing is different with > existing things, at least some comment in description makes review > easy. > > If it's memory footprint issue, should we care of other pagevec to > reduce memory footprint in non-smp? If it is, it would be a TODO list > for consistency and memory footprint. Yeah. indeed. Shaoua, If my remember is correct, your previous version has code size comparision result. could you resurrect it? -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org