[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190821005417.GC18776@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 17:54:17 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net,
osalvador@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/mmap.c: extract __vma_unlink_list as counter part
for __vma_link_list
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 08:52:34AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:26:29AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 11:19:37AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> >> On 8/14/19 8:57 AM, Wei Yang wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 10:16:11PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> >>Btw, is there any good reason we don't use a list_head for vma linkage?
> >> >
> >> > Not sure, maybe there is some historical reason?
> >>
> >> Seems it was single-linked until 2010 commit 297c5eee3724 ("mm: make the vma
> >> list be doubly linked") and I guess it was just simpler to add the vm_prev link.
> >>
> >> Conversion to list_head might be an interesting project for some "advanced
> >> beginner" in the kernel :)
> >
> >I'm working to get rid of vm_prev and vm_next, so it would probably be
> >wasted effort.
>
> You mean replace it with list_head?
No, replace the rbtree with a new tree. https://lwn.net/Articles/787629/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists