Re: [PATCH 5/5] writeback: IO-less balance_dirty_pages()

[Vivek Goyal]

On Sat, Aug 06, 2011 at 04:44:52PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:

[..]
> -		trace_balance_dirty_start(bdi);
> -		if (bdi_nr_reclaimable > task_bdi_thresh) {
> -			pages_written += writeback_inodes_wb(&bdi->wb,
> -							     write_chunk);
> -			trace_balance_dirty_written(bdi, pages_written);
> -			if (pages_written >= write_chunk)
> -				break;		/* We've done our duty */
> +		if (unlikely(!writeback_in_progress(bdi)))
> +			bdi_start_background_writeback(bdi);
> +
> +		base_bw = bdi->dirty_ratelimit;
> +		bw = bdi_position_ratio(bdi, dirty_thresh, nr_dirty,
> +					bdi_thresh, bdi_dirty);

For the sake of consistency of usage of varibale naming how about using

pos_ratio = bdi_position_ratio()?

> +		if (unlikely(bw == 0)) {
> +			pause = MAX_PAUSE;
> +			goto pause;
>  		}
> +		bw = (u64)base_bw * bw >> BANDWIDTH_CALC_SHIFT;

So far bw had pos_ratio as value now it will be replaced with actual
bandwidth as value. It makes code confusing. So using pos_ratio will
help.

		bw = (u64)base_bw * pos_ratio >> BANDWIDTH_CALC_SHIFT;

Thanks
Vivek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/