On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:01:31AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:

I am not sure it's good if we release the lock whenever lru->lock was contended
unconditionally? There are many kinds of lru_lock operations(add to lru, 
del from lru, isolation, reclaim, activation, deactivation and so on).

This is mostly to mirror cond_resched_lock (which actually uses
spin_needbreak but it's ok to have it also when preempt is off). I
doubt it makes a big difference but I tried to mirror
cond_resched_lock.

Do we really need to release the lock whenever all such operations were contened?
I think what we need is just spin_is_contended_irqcontext.
Otherwise, please write down the comment for justifying for it.

What is spin_is_contended_irqcontext?

This patch is for reducing for irq latency but do we have to check signal 
in irq hold time?

I think it's good idea to check the signal in case the loop is very
long and this is run in direct compaction context.

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>