On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 13:43 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/2/22 10:36, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote:
> > + spin_lock(&sgx_global_lru.lock);
> > for (i = 0; i < SGX_NR_TO_SCAN; i++) {
> > - if (list_empty(&sgx_active_page_list))
> > + epc_page =
> > sgx_epc_pop_reclaimable(&sgx_global_lru);
> > + if (!epc_page)
> > break;
>
> One other nit about the structure of the patches: This introduced
> *both*
> reclaimable and unreclaimable list_heads. But, it has zero use for
> the
> unreclaimable ones during the refactoring here. I probably would
> have
> left out the 'unreclaimable' bits for now.
I know - and originally the addition of unreclaimable was added later,
but when I posted the RFC I felt there was some misunderstanding about
what this data structure was and how it would be used because the
addition of the unreclaimable bits came later. So I stuck both lists in
one so it'd be a better view of what the data structure would look
like.
>
> BTW, this is a nice sign:
>
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/main.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++-------------
> > ----
> > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
>
