[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FB1A115.2080303@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 09:19:33 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/6] mm: memcg: statistics implementation cleanups
(2012/05/15 3:00), Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Before piling more things (reclaim stats) on top of the current mess,
> I thought it'd be better to clean up a bit.
>
> The biggest change is printing statistics directly from live counters,
> it has always been annoying to declare a new counter in two separate
> enums and corresponding name string arrays. After this series we are
> down to one of each.
>
> mm/memcontrol.c | 223 +++++++++++++++++------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 82 insertions(+), 141 deletions(-)
>
to all 1-6. Thank you.
Acked-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
One excuse for my old implementation of mem_cgroup_get_total_stat(),
which is fixed in patch 6, is that I thought it's better to touch all counters
in a cachineline at once and avoiding long distance for-each loop.
What number of performance difference with some big hierarchy(100+children) tree ?
(But I agree your code is cleaner. I'm just curious.)
Thanks,
-Kame
--
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