On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 16:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 20:57:54 +0800 Chen Yucong <slaoub@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 21:27 +0800, Chen Yucong wrote: > > > Via https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/334 , we can find that recording the > > > original scan targets introduces extra 40 bytes on the stack. This patch > > > is able to avoid this situation and the call to memcpy(). At the same time, > > > it does not change the relative design idea. > > > > > > ratio = original_nr_file / original_nr_anon; > > > > > > If (nr_file > nr_anon), then ratio = (nr_file - x) / nr_anon. > > > x = nr_file - ratio * nr_anon; > > > > > > if (nr_file <= nr_anon), then ratio = nr_file / (nr_anon - x). > > > x = nr_anon - nr_file / ratio; > > > > > Hi Andrew Morton, > > > > I think the patch > > > > [PATCH] > > mm-vmscanc-avoid-recording-the-original-scan-targets-in-shrink_lruvec-fix.patch > > > > which I committed should be discarded. > > OK, thanks. > > I assume you're referring to > mm-vmscanc-avoid-recording-the-original-scan-targets-in-shrink_lruvec.patch > - I don't think a -fix.patch existed? Yes. the patch that should be discarded is mm-vmscanc-avoid-recording-the-original-scan-targets-in-shrink_lruvec.patch thx! cyc -- 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>