On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:18:37 -0700
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

quoted text
> KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:58:10 +0530
> > Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> Sorry for the delay in sending out the new patch, I am traveling and
> >> thus a little less responsive. Here is the update patch
> >>
> >>
> > Hmm.. I've considered this approach for a while and my answer is that
> > this is not what you really want.
> > 
> > Because you just moves the placement of pointer from memmap to
> > radix_tree both in GFP_KERNEL, total kernel memory usage is not changed.
> 
> Agreed, but we do reduce the sizeof(struct page) without adding on to
> page_cgroup's size. So why don't we want this?
> 
> > So, at least, you have to add some address calculation (as I did in March)
> > to getting address of page_cgroup.
> 
> What address calculation do we need, sorry I don't recollect it.
> 
   base_address = base_addrees_of_page_group_chunk_of_pfn.
   base_address + offset_of_pfn_from_base_pfn * sizeof (struct page_cgroup).

Thanks,
-Kame

--
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/