[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e20ce97a-b713-f90d-e572-0aa54256bb42@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:22:22 +0800
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 20/21] mm/pgdat: remove pgdat lru_lock
在 2020/8/4 上午6:45, Alexander Duyck 写道:
> Just to correct a typo, I meant patch 17, not 18. in the comment below.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 3:42 PM Alexander Duyck
> <alexander.duyck@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 6:00 AM Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Now pgdat.lru_lock was replaced by lruvec lock. It's not used anymore.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>>> Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru>
>>> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
>>> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
>>> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org
>>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>>> Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org
>>
>> I really think this would be better just squashed into patch 18
>> instead of as a standalone patch since you were moving all of the
>> locking anyway so it would be more likely to trigger build errors if
>> somebody didn't move a lock somewhere that was referencing this.
Thanks for comments!
If someone changed the lru_lock between patch 17 and this, it would cause
more troubles then build error here. :) so don't warries for that.
But on the other side, I am so insist to have a ceremony to remove this lock...
>>
>> That said this change is harmless at this point.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
Thanks a lot for review!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists