[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090427132722.926b07f1.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:27:22 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ebmunson@...ibm.com, mel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
cl@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: meminfo Committed_AS underflows
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:17:13 +0530
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> * KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> [2009-04-15 13:10:06]:
>
> > > * KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> [2009-04-15 11:04:59]:
> > >
> > > > committed = atomic_long_read(&vm_committed_space);
> > > > + if (committed < 0)
> > > > + committed = 0;
> > >
Is there a reason why we can't use a boring old percpu_counter for
vm_committed_space? That way the meminfo code can just use
percpu_counter_read_positive().
Or perhaps just percpu_counter_read(). The percpu_counter code does a
better job of handling large cpu counts than the
mysteriously-duplicative open-coded stuff we have there.
--
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