[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201117180526.GA158333@rlk>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 02:05:26 +0800
From: Hui Su <sh_def@....com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/lru: simplify is_file_lru() and is_active_lru()
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:59:00PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:56:58AM +0800, Hui Su wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:47:27PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:46:33AM +0800, Hui Su wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote:
> > > > > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is
> > > > > > avtive lru-list or not.
> > > > > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is
> > > > > > file lru-list or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list()
> > > > > > and get_scan_count().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > v1->v2:
> > > > > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, still incorrect.
> > > >
> > > > I am a little confused, can you tell in detail?
> > >
> > > Have you booted a kernel with this change? Have you run any kind of
> > > tests on it?
> >
> > Yes, I boot it with qemu-system-x86_64-4.1.50 on ubuntu20.04:
> > qemu-system-x86_64 -kernel /home/rlk/workspace/compile/out/arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage -hda \
> > /home/rlk/myspace/qemu_build/rootfs.img -append "root=/dev/sda console=ttyS0" -nographic
> >
> > using the kernel compiled with ubuntu20.04's default .config.
> >
> > It seems nothing abnormal.
> > And i did not do other test.
>
> Maybe you should ... how about LTP? I think that's pretty straightforward
> to set up and run.
Thanks for your advice, Matthew.
I will set up an ltp test envirment, thanks again.
And Please ignore this change for now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists