Re: [PATCH 2/7] mm: vmscan: Convert lumpy_mode into a bitmask

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Mel Gorman
Date: Wednesday, December 1, 2010 - 3:50 am

On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 11:27:32AM +0100, Johannes Weiner wrote:

My problem with that is you have to infer what the behaviour is from what the
flags "are not" as opposed to what they are. For example, !LUMPY_MODE_SYNC
implies LUMPY_MODE_ASYNC instead of specifying LUMPY_MODE_ASYNC. It also
looks very odd when trying to distinguish between order-0 standard reclaim,
lumpy reclaim and reclaim/compaction.


It can't hurt!

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 2/7] mm: vmscan: Convert lumpy_mode into a bitmask, Mel Gorman, (Wed Dec 1, 3:50 am)