From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754188AbYLHOau (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2008 09:30:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752371AbYLHOam (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2008 09:30:42 -0500 Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.180]:9440 "EHLO wa-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752365AbYLHOal (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2008 09:30:41 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references:x-google-sender-auth; b=E3VB8GXAjqiWTEtKY/YQYDSrI5phjI9K/sb10p/ETRfVNb6oXT0NuafH4Djp9JdzYa cUmpM7bg6t6a40pulzkbsgmXh96TfVvAyFaLPMFyHoP7uHCZ2UsQ8VcX32BR25h0+Y0A ETGIaRNx8/Q6DcduM+l46GENVl210sLtk1RF4= Message-ID: <2f11576a0812080630j4327dbbgf0aa0e332156d229@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 23:30:40 +0900 From: "KOSAKI Motohiro" To: "Lee Schermerhorn" Subject: Re: [PATCH] memory hotplug: run lru_add_drain_all() on each cpu Cc: "Dave Hansen" , gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com, npiggin@suse.de In-Reply-To: <1228744588.22647.32.camel@lts-notebook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1228482500.8392.15.camel@t60p> <1228509818.12681.21.camel@nimitz> <20081207133450.53D8.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <1228744588.22647.32.camel@lts-notebook> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0be335245c5e8e18 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Lee, Could you read this thread and explain why you add ifdef CONFIG_UNEVICTABLE_LRU? >> I am not sure about that Dave's proposal is safe change. (but I guess he is right) > > I added that back in Patch 17/25 "Mlocked Pages are > non-reclaimable" [before nonreclaimable became unevictable". I did this > because "lru_add_drain_all()" was only used by numa code prior to this, > and was under #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA". I called lru_add_drain_all() from > __mlock_vma_pages_range() [since removed] and I wanted the > nonreclaimable/unevictable mlocked pages feature to be independent of > numa. So, I had to ensure that we defined the function for > nonreclaimable/unevictable lru as well as numa. > > Now it appears that hotplug and memcg also depend on > lru_add_drain_all(), so making it depend on 'SMP looks reasonable to me. Thanks a lot. I'll make that patch.