On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 03:09:42PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:01:55AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 11:20 +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > @@ -394,6 +395,7 @@ static int smaps_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, u
> > > > spin_lock(&walk->mm->page_table_lock);
> > > > } else {
> > > > smaps_pte_entry(*(pte_t *)pmd, addr, HPAGE_SIZE, walk);
> > > > + mss->anonymous_thp += HPAGE_SIZE;
> > >
> > > I should have thought of this for the previous patch but should this be
> > > HPAGE_PMD_SIZE instead of HPAGE_SIZE? Right now, they are the same value
> > > but they are not the same thing.
> >
> > Probably. There's also a nice BUG() in HPAGE_PMD_SIZE if the THP config
> > option is off, which is an added bonus.
> >
>
> Unless Andrea has an objection, I'd prefer to see HPAGE_PMD_SIZE.
We get there only through pmd_trans_huge, so HPAGE_PMD_SIZE is
certainly more correct, agreed.
I also think this can go in -mm after s/HPAGE_SIZE/HPAGE_PMD_SIZE/ and
after correcting the locking (see other email).
Maybe it'd be cleaner if we didn't need to cast the pmd to pte_t but I
guess this makes things simpler.
Thanks!
Andrea
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>