From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 14:10:19 -0800 (PST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: Skip reclaim_mapped determination if we do not swap In-Reply-To: <20060211135031.623fdef9.akpm@osdl.org> Message-ID: References: <20060211135031.623fdef9.akpm@osdl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com List-ID: On Sat, 11 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote: > For your enjoyment, here is a picture of what the resulting code looks like > in an 80-col window: > > http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/x.jpeg Ahh. Yes looks really ragged... > It would make things somewhat easier if I didn't have to go fixing up after > you all the time. I can fix this if this is the final resting place of the code. But should this piece of code really be there? Doesnt it belong ito shrink_zone() or even in try_to_free_pages() or balance_pgdat(). Shouldn't we pass reclaim_mapped as a parameter to refill_inactive_zone? -- 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