login
Login
/
Register
Search
Forums
News
Blogs
Features
Site
Home
»
Mailing list archives
»
linux-kernel
»
2008
»
March
»
4
Re: [patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
view
thread
!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [thread] [
date
] [
author
]
[view in full thread]
From:
Rik van Riel <riel@...>
To: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-mm@...>
Subject:
Re: [patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2008 - 5:21 pm
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 10:05:58 -0500 Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com> wrote:
quoted text
> > IMHO insert "lru" word is better. > > example, > > > > config NORECLAIM_LRU > > bool "Zone LRU of track non-reclaimable pages (EXPERIMENTAL; 64BIT only)" > > depends on EXPERIMENTAL && 64BIT > > OK. But, I'd suggest the 'bool' description be something like: > > config NORECLAIM_LRU > bool "Add LRU list to track non-reclaimable pages (EXPERIMENTAL; 64BIT only)"
I have added this in the 2.6.25-rc3-mm1 port.
quoted text
> > > > > @@ -356,8 +380,10 @@ void release_pages(struct page **pages, > > > zone = pagezone; > > > spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lru_lock, flags); > > > } > > > - VM_BUG_ON(!PageLRU(page)); > > > - __ClearPageLRU(page); > > > + is_lru_page = PageLRU(page); > > > + VM_BUG_ON(!(is_lru_page)); > > > + if (is_lru_page) > > > + __ClearPageLRU(page); > > > del_page_from_lru(zone, page); > > > } > > > > it seems unnecessary change?? > > Hmmm. Not sure what I was thinking here. Might be a relic of some > previous debug instrumentation. Guess I don't have any problem with > removing this change.
Removed. -- All Rights Reversed --
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Previous message: [
thread
] [
date
] [
author
]
Next message: [thread] [
date
] [
author
]
Messages in current thread:
[patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
, Rik van Riel
, (Thu Feb 28, 3:29 pm)
Re: [patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
, KOSAKI Motohiro
, (Tue Mar 4, 6:46 am)
Re: [patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
, Lee Schermerhorn
, (Tue Mar 4, 11:05 am)
Re: [patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
, KOSAKI Motohiro
, (Tue Mar 4, 9:42 pm)
Re: [patch 12/21] No Reclaim LRU Infrastructure
, Rik van Riel
, (Tue Mar 4, 5:21 pm)
Navigation
Create content
Mailing list archives
Recent posts
Popular discussions
linux-kernel
:
Greg Kroah-Hartman
[PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO
Tarkan Erimer
Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
James Bottomley
Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel
Robin Lee Powell
NFS hang + umount -f: better behaviour requested.
git
:
linux-netdev
:
David Miller
[GIT]: Networking
Jarek Poplawski
[PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock().
Natalie Protasevich
[BUG] New Kernel Bugs
Gerrit Renker
[PATCH 18/37] dccp: Support for Mandatory options
openbsd-misc
:
Colocation donated by:
Who's online
There are currently
3 users
and
844 guests
online.
Online users
olecom
ernestot1
alpha_one_x86
Syndicate