On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 08:48:21AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Wed 14-11-18 07:43:41, Wei Yang wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 10:07:58AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >On Tue 13-11-18 08:16:44, Wei Yang wrote:
>> >
>> >No, I believe we want all three of them. But reviewing
>> >for_each_populated_zone users and explicit checks for present/managed
>> >pages and unify them would be a step forward both a more optimal code
>> >and more maintainable code. I haven't checked but
>> >for_each_populated_zone would seem like a proper user for managed page
>> >counter. But that really requires to review all current users.
>> >
>>
>> To sync with your purpose, I searched the user of
>> for_each_populated_zone() and replace it with a new loop
>> for_each_managed_zone().
>
>I do not think we really want a new iterator. Is there any users of
>for_each_populated_zone which would be interested in something else than
>managed pages?
Your purpose is replace the populated_zone() in
for_each_populated_zone() with managed_zone()?
If this is the case, most of them is possible. Some places I am not sure
is:
kernel/power/snapshot.c
mm/huge_memory.c
mm/khugepaged.c
For other places, I thinks it is ok to replace it.
>--
>Michal Hocko
>SUSE Labs
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
