在 2023/9/18 20:08, 杨欢 写道:
> 在 2023/9/18 19:11, SeongJae Park 写道:
>> Hi Huan,
>>
>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:49:34 +0800 Huan Yang <link@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> si_meminfo() will read and assign more info not just free/ram pages.
>> Nice catch :)
>>
>>> For just DAMOS_WMARK_FREE_MEM_RATE use, only get free and ram pages
>>> is ok to save cpu.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Huan Yang <link@xxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> mm/damon/core.c | 10 ++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/damon/core.c b/mm/damon/core.c
>>> index bcd2bd9d6c10..1cddee9ae73b 100644
>>> --- a/mm/damon/core.c
>>> +++ b/mm/damon/core.c
>>> @@ -1278,14 +1278,16 @@ static bool kdamond_need_stop(struct damon_ctx *ctx)
>>> return true;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -static unsigned long damos_wmark_metric_value(enum damos_wmark_metric metric)
>>> +static unsigned long __damons_get_wmark_free_mem_rate(void)
>> Nit. s/damons/damos/ would look more consistently, in my opinion?
> HI, SJ, sorry, what's this mean?
Haha, I get, yes, damos is better. If you agree with below, I will
resend a new, rename to
__damos_get_wmark_free_mem_rate.
>>> {
>>> - struct sysinfo i;
>>> + return global_zone_page_state(NR_FREE_PAGES) * 1000 / totalram_pages();
>>> +}
>>>
>>> +static unsigned long damos_wmark_metric_value(enum damos_wmark_metric metric)
>>> +{
>>> switch (metric) {
>>> case DAMOS_WMARK_FREE_MEM_RATE:
>>> - si_meminfo(&i);
>>> - return i.freeram * 1000 / i.totalram;
>>> + return __damons_get_wmark_free_mem_rate();
>> Since __damons_get_wmark_free_mem_rate() is just one line function and
>> damos_wmark_metric_value() is the only user of the code, I think we could just
>> writ the code here?
> I do this in mine first patch, but then, I fold this into
> "__damons_get_wmark_free_mem_rate"
>
> due to I think the "__damons_get_wmark_free_mem_rate" may change the
> meaning for furture,
>
> and may si_meminfo will come back soon?(If we need more info to get the
> rate?). And, also, the
>
> static function If just some user use, it will be inline, so, I just
> think fold it will be better.
>
> Do you think so?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Huan
>
>>> default:
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> --
>>> 2.34.1
>> Thanks,
>> SJ
>
