Hi

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.

-- Kame

Dave Hansen wrote:

On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 05:03, Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA wrote:

quoted

-		MARK_USED(index + size, high, area);
+		page[size].flags |= (1 << PG_private);
+		page[size].private = high;
 	}
 	return page;
 }

...

quoted

+		/* Atomic operation is needless here */
+		page->flags &= ~(1 << PG_private);

See linux/page_flags.h:

#define SetPagePrivate(page)    set_bit(PG_private, &(page)->flags)
#define ClearPagePrivate(page)  clear_bit(PG_private, &(page)->flags)
#define PagePrivate(page)       test_bit(PG_private, &(page)->flags)

-- Dave

-- 
--the clue is these footmarks leading to the door.--
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [off-list ref]

--
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>