From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B35C3A589 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 14:22:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C75C3214DA for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 14:22:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C75C3214DA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6541A6B000C; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:22:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 604846B000D; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:22:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 542C16B000E; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:22:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0098.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.98]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30E366B000C for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 10:22:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B5F928248AC4 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 14:22:01 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75843020442.28.turn83_860757eaf1353 X-HE-Tag: turn83_860757eaf1353 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3807 Received: from out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com (out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com [47.88.44.36]) by imf39.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2019 14:22:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R181e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04420;MF=alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=36;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0Ta-z0CR_1566310900; Received: from IT-FVFX43SYHV2H.local(mailfrom:alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0Ta-z0CR_1566310900) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:21:42 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/14] mm/lru: fix the comments of lru_lock To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Tejun Heo , Jason Gunthorpe , Dan Williams , Vlastimil Babka , Ira Weiny , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Andrey Ryabinin , Jann Horn , Logan Gunthorpe , Souptick Joarder , Ralph Campbell , "Tobin C. Harding" , Michal Hocko , Oscar Salvador , Wei Yang , Johannes Weiner , Pavel Tatashin , Arun KS , "Darrick J. Wong" , Amir Goldstein , Dave Chinner , Josef Bacik , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= , Mike Kravetz , Hugh Dickins , Kirill Tkhai , Daniel Jordan , Yafang Shao , Yang Shi References: <1566294517-86418-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <1566294517-86418-15-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> <20190820140019.GB24642@bombadil.infradead.org> From: Alex Shi Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 22:21:39 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190820140019.GB24642@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gbk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: =D4=DA 2019/8/20 =CF=C2=CE=E710:00, Matthew Wilcox =D0=B4=B5=C0: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 05:48:37PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >> @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ static inline bool free_area_empty(struct free_are= a *area, int migratetype) >> struct pglist_data; >> =20 >> /* >> - * zone->lock and the zone lru_lock are two of the hottest locks in t= he kernel. >> + * zone->lock and the lru_lock are two of the hottest locks in the ke= rnel. >> * So add a wild amount of padding here to ensure that they fall into= separate >> * cachelines. There are very few zone structures in the machine, so= space >> * consumption is not a concern here. >=20 > But after this patch series, the lru lock is no longer stored in the zo= ne. > So this comment makes no sense. Yes, It's need reconsider here. thanks for opoint out. >=20 >> @@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ struct zone_reclaim_stat { >> =20 >> struct lruvec { >> struct list_head lists[NR_LRU_LISTS]; >> - /* move lru_lock to per lruvec for memcg */ >> + /* perf lruvec lru_lock for memcg */ >=20 > What does the word 'perf' mean here? sorry for typo, could be s/perf/per/ here. Thanks Alex =20