On 3/1/19 12:44 AM, John Hubbard wrote: > On 2/28/19 12:33 AM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote: >> We have common pattern to access lru_lock from a page pointer: >> zone_lru_lock(page_zone(page)) >> >> Which is silly, because it unfolds to this: >> &NODE_DATA(page_to_nid(page))->node_zones[page_zonenum(page)]->zone_pgdat->lru_lock >> while we can simply do >> &NODE_DATA(page_to_nid(page))->lru_lock >> > > Hi Andrey, > > Nice. I like it so much that I immediately want to tweak it. :) > > >> Remove zone_lru_lock() function, since it's only complicate things. >> Use 'page_pgdat(page)->lru_lock' pattern instead. > > Here, I think the zone_lru_lock() is actually a nice way to add > a touch of clarity at the call sites. How about, see below: > > [snip] > >> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h >> index 2fd4247262e9..22423763c0bd 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h >> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h >> @@ -788,10 +788,6 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { >> >> #define node_start_pfn(nid) (NODE_DATA(nid)->node_start_pfn) >> #define node_end_pfn(nid) pgdat_end_pfn(NODE_DATA(nid)) >> -static inline spinlock_t *zone_lru_lock(struct zone *zone) >> -{ >> - return &zone->zone_pgdat->lru_lock; >> -} >> > > Instead of removing that function, let's change it, and add another > (since you have two cases: either a page* or a pgdat* is available), > and move it to where it can compile, like this: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > index 80bb6408fe73..cea3437f5d68 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > @@ -1167,6 +1167,16 @@ static inline pg_data_t *page_pgdat(const struct page *page) > return NODE_DATA(page_to_nid(page)); > } > > +static inline spinlock_t *zone_lru_lock(pg_data_t *pgdat) > +{ > + return &pgdat->lru_lock; > +} > + I don't think wrapper for a simple plain access to the struct member is reasonable. Besides, there are plenty of "spin_lock(&pgdat->lru_lock)" even without this patch, so for consistency reasons &pgdat->lru_lock seems like a better choice to me. Also "&pgdat->lru_lock" is just shorter than: "node_lru_lock(pgdat)" > +static inline spinlock_t *zone_lru_lock_from_page(struct page *page) > +{ > + return zone_lru_lock(page_pgdat(page)); > +} > + I don't think such function would find any use. Usually lru_lock is taken to perform some manipulations with page *and* pgdat, thus it's better to remember page_pgdat(page) in local variable.