Re: [PATCH 3/7] Fragmentation Avoidance V16: 003_fragcore

[Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>]

On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Dave Hansen wrote:

> On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 15:46 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >
> > @@ -1483,8 +1540,10 @@ void show_free_areas(void)
> >
> >                 spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
> >                 for (order = 0; order < MAX_ORDER; order++) {
> > -                       nr = zone->free_area[order].nr_free;
> > -                       total += nr << order;
> > +                       for (type=0; type < RCLM_TYPES; type++) {
> > +                               nr = zone->free_area_lists[type][order].nr_free;
> > +                               total += nr << order;
> > +                       }
>
> Can that use the new for_each_ macro?
>

Now I remember why, it's because of the printf below "for (type=0" . The
printf has to happen once for each order. With the for_each_macro, it
would happen for each type *and* order.

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Java Applications Developer
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/