On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 10:44:57AM +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > > > 在 2019/11/16 下午2:28, Shakeel Butt 写道: > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 7:15 PM Alex Shi <alex.shi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Currently memcg still use per node pgdat->lru_lock to guard its lruvec. > >> That causes some lru_lock contention in a high container density system. > >> > >> If we can use per lruvec lock, that could relief much of the lru_lock > >> contention. > >> > >> The later patches will replace the pgdat->lru_lock with lruvec->lru_lock > >> and show the performance benefit by benchmarks. > > > > Merge this patch with actual usage. No need to have a separate patch. > > Thanks for comment, Shakeel! > > Yes, but considering the 3rd, huge and un-splitable patch of actully replacing, I'd rather to pull sth out from > it. Ty to make patches a bit more readable, Do you think so? This method of splitting the patches doesn't help with the reviewability of the patch series.
