Hey, On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 10:48:07PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > I really don't think memcg can afford to add more mess than there > > already is. Let's try to get things right with each change, please. > > Is this really about inside vs. outside skipping? I think this is a > general improvement to the code. I really prefer not duplicating common > code and skipping handling is such a code (we have a visitor which can > control the walk). With a side bonus that it doesn't have to pollute > vmscan more than necessary. > > Please be more specific about _what_ is so ugly about this interface so > that it matters so much. Can you please try the other approach and see how it looks? It's just my general experience that you usually end up with something much uglier when you try to do much inside an iterator and having to add callbacks which need to communicate through enums is usually a pretty good sign that it took a wrong turn somewhere. There sure are cases where such approach is necessary but I really don't see it here. So, it'd be really great if you can give a shot. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>