[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <75b4f840-7454-d6d0-5453-f0a045c852fa@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 10:10:45 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, richardw.yang@...ux.intel.com,
osalvador@...e.de, dan.j.williams@...el.com, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
robin.murphy@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] mm/hotplug: Only use subsection map in VMEMMAP
case
>>> include/linux/mmzone.h | 2 +
>>> mm/sparse.c | 178 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>>> 2 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
>>
>> Why do we need to add so much code to remove a functionality from one
>> memory model?
>
> Hmm, Dan also asked this before.
>
> The adding mainly happens in patch 2, 3, 4, including the two newly
> added function defitions, the code comments above them, and those added
> dummy functions for !VMEMMAP.
AFAIKS, it's mostly a bunch of newly added comments on top of functions.
E.g., the comment for fill_subsection_map() alone spans 12 LOC in total.
I do wonder if we have to be that verbose. We are barely that verbose on
MM code (and usually I don't see much benefit unless it's a function
with many users from many different places).
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists