2016-07-01 23:20 GMT+09:00 Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> On 07/01/2016 05:15 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 2016-07-01 23:03 GMT+09:00 Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> >>>>>> + >>>>>> + if (obj_cache == cache) >>>>>> + qlist_put(to, qlink, cache->size); >>>>>> + else >>>>>> + qlist_put(from, qlink, cache->size); >>>>> >>>>> This line is wrong. If obj_cache != cache, object size != cache->size. >>>>> Quarantine contains objects of different sizes. >>>> >>>> You're right. 11 pm is not good time to work. :/ >>>> If it is fixed, the patch looks correct to you? >>>> I will fix it and send v4 on next week. >>> >>> >>> I don't see anything else wrong. But I need to see how you fix the size issue. >>> Performance of this operation is not particularly critical, so the >>> simpler the better. >> >> Is there any other way besides obvious: s/cache->size/obj_cache->size ? > > We can remember the original bytes, then subtract > num_objects_moved*cache->size from it and assign to from->bytes. I'd prefer s/cache->size/obj_cache->size. It looks simpler. If there is no objection, I will use it on v4. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>