Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752421AbWKAVT4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2006 16:19:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752443AbWKAVT4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2006 16:19:56 -0500 Received: from pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com ([205.158.62.125]:11147 "HELO pop5-1.us4.outblaze.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752421AbWKAVTz (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2006 16:19:55 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use extents for recording what swap is allocated. From: Nigel Cunningham To: Pavel Machek Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML In-Reply-To: <20061101123603.GA7195@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> References: <1161576857.3466.9.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <20061024204239.GA15689@infradead.org> <1162294689.19737.22.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <20061101123603.GA7195@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 08:19:52 +1100 Message-Id: <1162415992.5737.8.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1661 Lines: 42 Hi. On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 13:36 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 21:42 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 02:14:17PM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > Switch from bitmaps to using extents to record what swap is allocated; > > > > they make more efficient use of memory, particularly where the allocated > > > > storage is small and the swap space is large. > > > > > > > > This is also part of the ground work for implementing support for > > > > supporting multiple swap devices. > > > > > > In addition to the very useful comments from Rafael there's some observations > > > of my own: > > > > > > - there's an awful lot of opencoded list manipulation, any chance you > > > could use list.h instead? > > > > Further to this, I gave using list.h a go. Unfortunately it doesn't look > > to me like it is a good idea: in adding a range, I'm comparing the new > > range to the maximum of one extent and the minimum of the next, so > > finding the minimum of the next extent becomes a lot uglier than it > > currently is. Currently it's just ->next->minimum, but with list.h, I'd > > need container_of(current->list.next)->minimum. Or am I missing > > something? > > That does not look that scary... just do it. It currently makes more sense to me to stick with what I already have because it's simpler and more readable. Regards, Nigel - 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/