lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH][RFC] dirty balancing for cgroups
    Date
    From
    hi,

    > > @@ -485,7 +502,10 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_isolate_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
    > > if (PageUnevictable(page) ||
    > > (PageActive(page) && !active) ||
    > > (!PageActive(page) && active)) {
    > > - __mem_cgroup_move_lists(pc, page_lru(page));
    > > + if (try_lock_page_cgroup(page)) {
    > > + __mem_cgroup_move_lists(pc, page_lru(page));
    > > + unlock_page_cgroup(page);
    > > + }
    > > continue;
    > > }
    >
    > This chunk seems unrelated and lost....

    it's necessary to protect from mem_cgroup_{set,clear}_dirty
    which modify pc->flags without holding mz->lru_lock.

    > I presonally dislike the != 0, == 0 comparisons for bitmask operations,
    > they seem to make it harder to read somewhow. I prefer to write !(flags
    > & mask) and (flags & mask), instead.
    >
    > I guess taste differs,...

    yes, it seems different. :)

    YAMAMOTO Takashi


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-08-13 09:19    [W:0.027 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site