[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101201102732.GK15564@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 11:27:32 +0100
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] mm: vmscan: Convert lumpy_mode into a bitmask
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 03:43:50PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -51,11 +51,20 @@
> #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
> #include <trace/events/vmscan.h>
>
> -enum lumpy_mode {
> - LUMPY_MODE_NONE,
> - LUMPY_MODE_ASYNC,
> - LUMPY_MODE_SYNC,
> -};
> +/*
> + * lumpy_mode determines how the inactive list is shrunk
> + * LUMPY_MODE_SINGLE: Reclaim only order-0 pages
> + * LUMPY_MODE_ASYNC: Do not block
> + * LUMPY_MODE_SYNC: Allow blocking e.g. call wait_on_page_writeback
> + * LUMPY_MODE_CONTIGRECLAIM: For high-order allocations, take a reference
> + * page from the LRU and reclaim all pages within a
> + * naturally aligned range
I find those names terribly undescriptive. It also strikes me as an
odd set of flags. Can't this be represented with less?
LUMPY_MODE_ENABLED
LUMPY_MODE_SYNC
or, after the rename,
RECLAIM_MODE_HIGHER = 1
RECLAIM_MODE_SYNC = 2
RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPY = 4
where compaction mode is default if RECLAIM_MODE_HIGHER, and
RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPY will go away eventually.
Also, if you have a flag name for 'reclaim with extra efforts for
higher order pages' that is better than RECLAIM_MODE_HIGHER... ;)
> +typedef unsigned __bitwise__ lumpy_mode;
lumpy_mode_t / reclaim_mode_t?
--
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