Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753711Ab2EaGRR (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 May 2012 02:17:17 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:55236 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752066Ab2EaGRP (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 May 2012 02:17:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 06:17:07 +0800 From: baozich To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Andrew Morton , Konstantin Khlebnikov , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/memcg: apply add/del_page to lruvec Message-ID: <20120530221707.GA25095@centos-guest> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1569 Lines: 35 Hi Hugh, On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 10:02:28PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > Take lruvec further: pass it instead of zone to add_page_to_lru_list() > and del_page_from_lru_list(); and pagevec_lru_move_fn() pass lruvec > down to its target functions. > > This cleanup eliminates a swathe of cruft in memcontrol.c, > including mem_cgroup_lru_add_list(), mem_cgroup_lru_del_list() and > mem_cgroup_lru_move_lists() - which never actually touched the lists. > > In their place, mem_cgroup_page_lruvec() to decide the lruvec, > previously a side-effect of add, and mem_cgroup_update_lru_size() > to maintain the lru_size stats. I have a stupid question. I'm not sure whether there is reduplication to put both "page" and "zone" parameter in mem_cgroup_page_lruvec(), for I noticed that the "struct zone *zone" parameter are usually from page_zone(page) in most cases. I think that the semantics of this function is to grab the lruvec the page belongs to. So will it be ok if we pass only "page" as the parameter, which I think would be cleaner? Please fix me if I missed something. Thanks Baozi > > Whilst these are simplifications in their own right, the goal is to > bring the evaluation of lruvec next to the spin_locking of the lrus, > in preparation for a future patch. > > Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins -- 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/