Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Sep 2015 15:19:07 +0300 | From | "Kirill A. Shutemov" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv5 1/7] mm: drop page->slab_page |
| |
On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 10:00:57PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On 09/03/2015 05:35 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > >Since 8456a648cf44 ("slab: use struct page for slab management") nobody > >uses slab_page field in struct page. > > > >Let's drop it. > > > >Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> > >Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> > >Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> > >Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> > >Cc: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> > >Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> > >--- > > include/linux/mm_types.h | 1 - > > mm/slab.c | 17 +++-------------- > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h > >index 0038ac7466fd..58620ac7f15c 100644 > >--- a/include/linux/mm_types.h > >+++ b/include/linux/mm_types.h > >@@ -140,7 +140,6 @@ struct page { > > #endif > > }; > >- struct slab *slab_page; /* slab fields */ > > struct rcu_head rcu_head; /* Used by SLAB > > * when destroying via RCU > > */ > >diff --git a/mm/slab.c b/mm/slab.c > >index 200e22412a16..649044f26e5d 100644 > >--- a/mm/slab.c > >+++ b/mm/slab.c > >@@ -1888,21 +1888,10 @@ static void slab_destroy(struct kmem_cache *cachep, struct page *page) > > freelist = page->freelist; > > slab_destroy_debugcheck(cachep, page); > >- if (unlikely(cachep->flags & SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU)) { > >- struct rcu_head *head; > >- > >- /* > >- * RCU free overloads the RCU head over the LRU. > >- * slab_page has been overloeaded over the LRU, > >- * however it is not used from now on so that > >- * we can use it safely. > >- */ > >- head = (void *)&page->rcu_head; > >- call_rcu(head, kmem_rcu_free); > >- > >- } else { > >+ if (unlikely(cachep->flags & SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU)) > >+ call_rcu(&page->rcu_head, kmem_rcu_free); > >+ else > > kmem_freepages(cachep, page); > >- } > > /* > > * From now on, we don't use freelist > > This second piece looks like it belongs in patch 2, not patch 1 based on the > descriptions.
You're right.
Although I don't think I would re-spin the patchset just for this change. If any other change would be required, I'll fix this too.
-- Kirill A. Shutemov
| |