[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080526102309.01b9bc9a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 10:23:09 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] explicitly document overloaded page flags V2
On Fri, 23 May 2008 17:33:01 +0100
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org> wrote:
> With the recent page flag reorganisation we have a single enum which
> defines the valid page flags and their values, nice and clear. However
> there are a number of bits which are overloaded by different subsystems.
> Firstly there is PG_owner_priv_1 which is used by filesystems and by XEN.
> Secondly both SLOB and SLUB use a couple of extra page bits to manage
> internal state for pages they own; both overlay other bits. All of these
> "aliases" are scattered about the source making it very hard for a reader
> to know if the bits are safe to rely on in all contexts; confusion here
> is bad.
>
> As we now have a single place where the bits are clearly assigned it makes
> sense to clarify the reuse of bits by making the aliases explicit and
> visible with the original bit assignments. This patch creates explicit
> aliases within the enum itself for the overloaded bits, creates standard
> bit accessors PageFoo etc. and uses those throughout.
>
> This version pulls the bit manipulation out to standard named page bit
> accessors as suggested by Christoph, it retains the explicit mapping to
> the overlayed bits. A fusion of both ideas. This has been SLUB and
> SLOB have been compile tested on x86_64 only, and SLUB boot tested.
> If people feel this is worth doing then I can run a fuller set of testing.
>
Thanks, I like this style of page-flags definition.
BTW, I have a quiestion as crash-dump user. With this 'enum' style, position of
each flags in page->flags depends on configs. Can we know what a bit means from
dump or bad_page()'s message ? (not a big problem now but..)
Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists