On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:28:00 +0200
Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
> while reading the code I have encountered the following thing. It is no
> biggie but...
> ---
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Remove pointless next_mz nullification in mem_cgroup_soft_limit_reclaim
>
> next_mz is assigned to NULL if __mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node selects
> the same mz. This doesn't make much sense as we assign to the variable
> right in the next loop.
>
> Compiler will probably optimize this out but it is little bit confusing for
> the code reading.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
>
> Index: linux-2.6.38-rc8/mm/memcontrol.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.38-rc8.orig/mm/memcontrol.c 2011-03-28 11:25:14.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.38-rc8/mm/memcontrol.c 2011-03-29 15:24:08.000000000 +0200
> @@ -3349,7 +3349,6 @@ unsigned long mem_cgroup_soft_limit_recl
> __mem_cgroup_largest_soft_limit_node(mctz);
> if (next_mz == mz) {
> css_put(&next_mz->mem->css);
> - next_mz = NULL;
> } else /* next_mz == NULL or other memcg */
> break;
> } while (1);
hmm, make sense.
Can you remove the braces of the if-else statement too ?
Thanks,
Daisuke Nishimura.
--
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>