On Mon, 2 Jun 2014, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Meanwhile, I think that this change is not good for readability. There
> are many for_each_online_node() usage that we can't replace, so I don't
We can replace many of them if we do not pass "node" around but a pointer
to the node structure. Like here:
Subject: slab: Use for_each_kmem_cache_work by reworking call chain fopr slab_set_lock_classes
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@xxxxxxxxx>
Index: linux/mm/slab.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/mm/slab.c 2014-06-02 10:50:26.631319986 -0500
+++ linux/mm/slab.c 2014-06-02 12:34:15.279952487 -0500
@@ -455,16 +455,11 @@ static struct lock_class_key debugobj_al
static void slab_set_lock_classes(struct kmem_cache *cachep,
struct lock_class_key *l3_key, struct lock_class_key *alc_key,
- int q)
+ struct kmem_cache_node *n)
{
struct array_cache **alc;
- struct kmem_cache_node *n;
int r;
- n = get_node(cachep, q);
- if (!n)
- return;
-
lockdep_set_class(&n->list_lock, l3_key);
alc = n->alien;
/*
@@ -482,17 +477,19 @@ static void slab_set_lock_classes(struct
}
}
-static void slab_set_debugobj_lock_classes_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep, int node)
+static void slab_set_debugobj_lock_classes_node(struct kmem_cache *cachep,
+ struct kmem_cache_node *ne)
{
- slab_set_lock_classes(cachep, &debugobj_l3_key, &debugobj_alc_key, node);
+ slab_set_lock_classes(cachep, &debugobj_l3_key, &debugobj_alc_key, n);
}
static void slab_set_debugobj_lock_classes(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
{
int node;
+ struct kmem_cache_node *n;
- for_each_online_node(node)
- slab_set_debugobj_lock_classes_node(cachep, node);
+ for_each_kmem_cache_node(cachep, node, h)
+ slab_set_debugobj_lock_classes_node(cachep, n);
}
static void init_node_lock_keys(int q)
--
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>