Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 20 May 2009 11:21:29 +0100 | From | Mel Gorman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] clean up setup_per_zone_pages_min |
| |
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 06:58:03PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > Hi, Mel. > > On Wed, 20 May 2009 09:54:16 +0100 > Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> wrote: > > > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 04:18:53PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > > > > Mel changed zone->pages_[high/low/min] with zone->watermark array. > > > So, setup_per_zone_pages_min also have to be changed. > > > > > > > Just to be clear, this is a function renaming to match the new zone > > field name, not something I missed. As the function changes min, low and > > max, a better name might have been setup_per_zone_watermarks but whether > > At first, I thouht, too. But It's handle of min_free_kbytes. > Documentation said, it's to compute a watermark[WMARK_MIN]. > I think many people already used that knob to contorl pages_min to keep the > low pages.
Which documentation?
I'm looking at the function comment and see
* setup_per_zone_pages_min - called when min_free_kbytes changes. * * Ensures that the pages_{min,low,high} values for each zone are set * correctly with respect to min_free_kbytes.
So, the values of all the watermarks are updated by that function depending on what the new value of min_free_kbytes is. It is a bit wrong I suppose as it missed memory hot-add
setup_per_zone_pages_min - called when min_free_kbytes changes or when memory is hot-added
> > So, I determined function name is proper now. > If setup_per_zone_watermark is better than it, we also have to change with > documentation. > > > you go with that name or not, this is better than what is there so; > > > > Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> > > > -- > Kinds Regards > Minchan Kim >
-- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
| |