[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <w2h28c262361004150449qdea5cde9y687c1fce30e665d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 20:49:17 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Bob Liu <lliubbo@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 04/15/2010 07:21 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>> kill alloc_pages_exact_node?
>> Sorry but I can't understand your point.
>> I don't want to kill user of alloc_pages_exact_node.
>> That's opposite.
>> I want to kill user of alloc_pages_node and change it with
>> alloc_pages_any_node or alloc_pages_exact_node. :)
>
> I see, so...
>
> alloc_pages() -> alloc_pages_any_node()
> alloc_pages_node() -> alloc_pages_exact_node()
>
> right? It just seems strange to me and different from usual naming
> convention - ie. something which doesn't care about nodes usually
> doesn't carry _node postfix. Anyways, no big deal, those names just
> felt a bit strange to me.
I don't want to remove alloc_pages for UMA system.
#define alloc_pages alloc_page_sexact_node
What I want to remove is just alloc_pages_node. :)
Sorry for confusing you.
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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