Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1760104Ab3CHApm (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:45:42 -0500
Received: from LGEMRELSE1Q.lge.com ([156.147.1.111]:62771 "EHLO
	LGEMRELSE1Q.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1759272Ab3CHApk (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:45:40 -0500
X-AuditID: 9c93016f-b7b46ae000000e4b-26-513934b14d6b
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 09:45:50 +0900
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: page_alloc: remove branch operation in
 free_pages_prepare()
Message-ID: <20130308004550.GA19010@lge.com>
References: <1362644480-18381-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1303071050080.6087@eggly.anvils>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1303071050080.6087@eggly.anvils>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2158
Lines: 59

Hello, Hugh.

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:54:15AM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2013, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> 
> > When we found that the flag has a bit of PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP,
> > we reset the flag. If we always reset the flag, we can reduce one
> > branch operation. So remove it.
> > 
> > Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> 
> I don't object to this patch.  But certainly I would have written it
> that way in order not to dirty a cacheline unnecessarily.  It may be
> obvious to you that the cacheline in question is almost always already
> dirty, and the branch almost always more expensive.  But I'll leave that
> to you, and to those who know more about these subtle costs than I do.

Yes. I already think about that. I thought that even if a cacheline is
not dirty at this time, we always touch the 'struct page' in
set_freepage_migratetype() a little later, so dirtying is not the problem.

But, now, I re-think this and decide to drop this patch.
The reason is that 'struct page' of 'compound pages' may not be dirty
at this time and will not be dirty at later time.
So this patch is bad idea.

Is there any comments?

Thanks.

> Hugh
> 
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index 8fcced7..778f2a9 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -614,8 +614,7 @@ static inline int free_pages_check(struct page *page)
> >  		return 1;
> >  	}
> >  	page_nid_reset_last(page);
> > -	if (page->flags & PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP)
> > -		page->flags &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP;
> > +	page->flags &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP;
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> 
> --
> 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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
--
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/