[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702281008330.21257@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:14:30 -0800 (PST)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@...r.sgi.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Lumpy Reclaim V3
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> +static int __isolate_lru_page(struct page *page, int active)
> +{
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (PageLRU(page) && (PageActive(page) == active)) {
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + if (likely(get_page_unless_zero(page))) {
> + /*
> + * Be careful not to clear PageLRU until after we're
> + * sure the page is not being freed elsewhere -- the
> + * page release code relies on it.
> + */
> + ClearPageLRU(page);
> + ret = 0;
Is that really necessary? PageLRU is clear when a page is freed right?
And clearing PageLRU requires the zone->lru_lock since we have to move it
off the LRU.
> - ClearPageLRU(page);
> - target = dst;
> + active = PageActive(page);
Why are we saving the active state? Page cannot be moved between LRUs
while we hold the lru lock anyways.
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists