On 10/3/07, Adam Litke <[email protected]> wrote:
> The key is that we don't want to shrink the pool below the number of
> pages we are committed to keeping around. Before this patch, we only
> accounted for the pages we plan to hand out (reserved huge pages) but
> not the ones we've already handed out (total - free). Does that make
> sense?
Good catch, adam.
>From what I can see, the statement
if (count >= nr_huge_pages)
return nr_huge_pages;
in set_max_huge_pages() is useless because (1) we recalculate "count"
variable below it; and (2) both try_to_free_low() and the while loop
below the call to try_to_free_low() will terminate correctly. If you
feel like it, please clean it up as well.
If not, I'm fine with that.
Acked-by: Ken Chen <[email protected]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
