[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1402962603.3958.36.camel@debian>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 07:50:03 +0800
From: Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: mhocko@...e.cz, hannes@...xchg.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmscan.c: avoid recording the original scan targets
in shrink_lruvec()
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 16:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 20:57:54 +0800 Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 21:27 +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:
> > > Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/334 , we can find that recording the
> > > original scan targets introduces extra 40 bytes on the stack. This patch
> > > is able to avoid this situation and the call to memcpy(). At the same time,
> > > it does not change the relative design idea.
> > >
> > > ratio = original_nr_file / original_nr_anon;
> > >
> > > If (nr_file > nr_anon), then ratio = (nr_file - x) / nr_anon.
> > > x = nr_file - ratio * nr_anon;
> > >
> > > if (nr_file <= nr_anon), then ratio = nr_file / (nr_anon - x).
> > > x = nr_anon - nr_file / ratio;
> > >
> > Hi Andrew Morton,
> >
> > I think the patch
> >
> > [PATCH]
> > mm-vmscanc-avoid-recording-the-original-scan-targets-in-shrink_lruvec-fix.patch
> >
> > which I committed should be discarded.
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> I assume you're referring to
> mm-vmscanc-avoid-recording-the-original-scan-targets-in-shrink_lruvec.patch
> - I don't think a -fix.patch existed?
Yes. the patch that should be discarded is
mm-vmscanc-avoid-recording-the-original-scan-targets-in-shrink_lruvec.patch
thx!
cyc
--
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