linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/10] mm: count reclaimable pages per BDI

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]

Message-Id: <20070421025521.8d77072e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 21 Apr 2007 02:55:21 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	miklos@...redi.hu, neilb@...e.de, dgc@....com,
	tomoki.sekiyama.qu@...achi.com, nikita@...sterfs.com,
	trond.myklebust@....uio.no, yingchao.zhou@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] mm: count reclaimable pages per BDI

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:52:01 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:

> Count per BDI reclaimable pages; nr_reclaimable = nr_dirty + nr_unstable.

hm.  Aggregating dirty and unstable at inc/dec time is a bit kludgy.  If
later on we want to know just "dirty" then we're in trouble.

I can see the logic behind it though.

Perhaps one could have separate BDI_DIRTY and BDI_UNSTABLE and treat them
separately at inc/dec time, but give them the same numerical value, so
they in fact refer to the same counter.  That's kludgy too.
-
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/