Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:14:10 +0200
From:   Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To:     Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Cc:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ying.huang@intel.com,
        mgorman@techsingularity.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/vmscan: reclaim only affects managed_zones
Message-ID: <YkFuUsWe2LAuQa3n@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20220327024101.10378-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220327024101.10378-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 02:41:00AM +0000, Wei Yang wrote:
> As mentioned in commit 6aa303defb74 ("mm, vmscan: only allocate and
> reclaim from zones with pages managed by the buddy allocator") , reclaim
> only affects managed_zones.
> 
> Let's adjust the code and comment accordingly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>

LGTM,

Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>

We still have some other places scattered all over where we use
populated_zone().
I think it should be great to check whether all those usages are
right.


-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE Labs