Hello,
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 01:44:30PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > +static bool need_activate_page_drain(int cpu)
> > +{
> > + return pagevec_count(&per_cpu(activate_page_pvecs, cpu)) != 0;
> > +}
>
> static int need_activate_page_drain(int cpu)
> {
> return pagevec_count(&per_cpu(activate_page_pvecs, cpu));
> }
>
> would be shorter and faster. bool rather sucks that way. It's a
> performance-vs-niceness thing. I guess one has to look at the call
> frequency when deciding.
"!= 0" can be dropped but I'm fairly sure the compiler would be able
to figure out that the type conversion can be skipped. It's a trivial
optimization.
> > + schedule_work_on(cpu, work);
> > + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, &has_work);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + for_each_cpu(cpu, &has_work)
>
> for_each_online_cpu()?
That would lead to flushing work items which aren't used and may not
have been initialized yet, no?
> > + flush_work(&per_cpu(lru_add_drain_work, cpu));
> > +
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > + mutex_unlock(&lock);
> > }
>
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>