Hi Michal,
>> >
>> >Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.com>
>> >
>> >Is there any reason to move declarations here?
>> >
>>
>> "unsigned int ret" was changed mistakenely, sending V2.
>> and "unsigned int nr_reclaimed" is changed to remove hole.
>Could you be more specific? Have you seen a better stack allocation
>footprint?
We didn't check stack allocation footprint, we did changes just by looking into
the code.
we thought changing reclaimed type from long to int on 64 bit platform will add
hole of 4 bytes between two stack variables nr_reclaimed & nr_taken.
So we tried to remove that hole by packing it with bool.
unsigned long nr_scanned; --> Size and alignment 8 byte
for long
- unsigned long nr_reclaimed = 0; --> Changing to int will make
its size as 4
unsigned long nr_taken; --> nr_taken needs alignment
of 8 so will add hole.
struct reclaim_stat stat;
int file = is_file_lru(lru);
enum vm_event_item item;
struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
struct zone_reclaim_stat *reclaim_stat = &lruvec->reclaim_stat;
+ unsigned int nr_reclaimed = 0; --> So moving to this place
to pack it along with bool
bool stalled = false;
Overall stack footprint might not change as compiler makes function stack
pointer as 16 byte aligned but we did this
as we normally follow this coding convention when defining structures or stack
variables.
Thanks & Regards,
Vaneet Narang
