On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 16:05, Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA wrote:

I understand using these macros cleans up codes as I used them in my previous
version.

In the previous version, I used SetPagePrivate()/ClearPagePrivate()/PagePrivate().
But these are "atomic" operation and looks very slow.
This is why I doesn't used these macros in this version.

My previous version, which used set_bit/test_bit/clear_bit, shows very bad performance
on my test, and I replaced it.

If I made a mistake on measuring the performance and set_bit/test_bit/clear_bit
is faster than what I think, I'd like to replace them.

Sorry, I misread your comment:

/* Atomic operation is needless here */

I read "needless" as "needed".  Would it make any more sense to you to
say "already have lock, don't need atomic ops", instead?

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org"> aart@kvack.org </a>