linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: remove struct reclaim

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:07:02 +0400
From:	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
CC:	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: remove struct reclaim_state

Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 01:28:06PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>> Memory reclaimer want to know how much pages was reclaimed during shrinking slabs.
>> Currently there is special struct reclaim_state with single counter and pointer from
>> task-struct. Let's store counter direcly on task struct and account freed pages
>> unconditionally. This will reduce stack usage and simplify code in reclaimer and slab.
>>
>> Logic in do_try_to_free_pages() is slightly changed, but this is ok.
>> Nobody calls shrink_slab() explicitly before do_try_to_free_pages(),
>
> Except for drop_slab() and shake_page()....

Indeed, but they do not care about accounting reclaimed pages and
they do not call do_try_to_free_pages() after all.

>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/