Re: [PATCH 2/2 v3]mm: batch activate_page() to reduce lock contention

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pagevec, activate_page_pvecs);
> > 
> > Why do we have to handle SMP and !SMP?
> > We have been not separated in case of pagevec using in swap.c.
> > If you have a special reason, please write it down.
> this is to reduce memory footprint as suggested by akpm.
> 
> Thanks,
> Shaohua

Hi Shaouhua,

I agree with you. But, please please avoid full quote. I don't think
it is so much difficult work. ;-)



--
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>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]