[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150914120455.GD30743@esperanza>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 15:04:55 +0300
From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: <benh@...nel.crashing.org>, <paulus@...ba.org>,
<mpe@...erman.id.au>, <anton@...ba.org>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<gkurz@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, <zhong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<grant.likely@...aro.org>, <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Replace nr_node_ids for loop with for_each_node
in list lru
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 05:09:31PM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> On 09/14/2015 02:30 PM, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 12:01:46AM +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> >>The functions used in the patch are in slowpath, which gets called
> >>whenever alloc_super is called during mounts.
> >>
> >>Though this should not make difference for the architectures with
> >>sequential numa node ids, for the powerpc which can potentially have
> >>sparse node ids (for e.g., 4 node system having numa ids, 0,1,16,17
> >>is common), this patch saves some unnecessary allocations for
> >>non existing numa nodes.
> >>
> >>Even without that saving, perhaps patch makes code more readable.
> >
> >Do I understand correctly that node 0 must always be in
> >node_possible_map? I ask, because we currently test
> >lru->node[0].memcg_lrus to determine if the list is memcg aware.
> >
>
> Yes, node 0 is always there. So it should not be a problem.
I think it should be mentioned in the comment to list_lru_memcg_aware
then.
Thanks,
Vladimir
--
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