On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Dave Hansen wrote:

> On Sun, 2005-02-27 at 13:43 +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > +           /*
> > +            * If this is a request for a zero page and the page was
> > +            * not taken from the USERZERO pool, zero it all
> > +            */
> > +           if ((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && alloctype != ALLOC_USERZERO) {
> > +                   int zero_order=order;
> > +
> > +                   /*
> > +                    * This is important. We are about to zero a block
> > +                    * which may be larger than we need so we have to
> > +                    * determine do we zero just what we need or do
> > +                    * we zero the whole block and put the pages in
> > +                    * the zero page.
> > +                    *
> > +                    * We zero the whole block in the event we are taking
> > +                    * from the KERNNORCLM pools and otherwise zero just
> > +                    * what we need. The reason we do not always zero
> > +                    * everything is because we do not want unreclaimable
> > +                    * pages to leak into the USERRCLM and KERNRCLM
> > +                    * pools
> > +                    *
> > +                    */
> > +                   if (alloctype != ALLOC_USERRCLM &&
> > +                       alloctype != ALLOC_KERNRCLM) {
> > +                           area = zone->free_area_lists[ALLOC_USERZERO] +
> > +                                   current_order;
> > +                           zero_order = current_order;
> > +                   }
> > +
> > +
> > +                   spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, *irq_flags);
> > +                   prep_zero_page(page, zero_order, flags);
> > +                   inc_zeroblock_count(zone, zero_order, flags);
> > +                   spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, *irq_flags);
> > +
> > +           }
> > +
> >             return expand(zone, page, order, current_order, area);
> >     }
> >
>
> I think it would make sense to put that in its own helper function.
> When comments get that big, they often reduce readability.  The only
> outside variable that gets modified is "area", I think.
>
> So, a static inline:
>
>       area = my_new_function_with_the_huge_comment(zone, ..., area);
>

Will make that change in the next version. It makes perfect sense.

> BTW, what kernel does this apply against?  Is linux-2.6.11-rc4-v18 the
> same as bk18?
>

It applies on top of 2.6.11-rc4 with the latest version of the placement
policy. Admittedly, the naming of the tree is not very obvious.

-- 
Mel Gorman
-
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/

Reply via email to