On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:31:01 +0400 Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:51:36 +0400 > > Konstantin Khlebnikov<khlebnikov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> v3 changes: > >> * inactive-ratio reworked again, now it always calculated from from scratch > >> * hierarchical pte reference bits filter in memory-cgroup reclaimer > >> * fixed two bugs in locking, found by Hugh Dickins > >> * locking functions slightly simplified > >> * new patch for isolated pages accounting > >> * new patch with lru interleaving > >> > >> This patchset is based on next-20120210 > >> > >> git: https://github.com/koct9i/linux/commits/lruvec-v3 > >> > > > > I wonder.... I just wonder...if we can split a lruvec in a zone into small > > pieces of lruvec and have splitted LRU-lock per them, do we need per-memcg-lrulock ? > > What per-memcg-lrulock? I don't have it. > last patch splits lruvecs in memcg with the same factor. > Okay, I missed it. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. 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>