[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <x2h28c262361004220315v9b8fbf3ei86fe0ebba92169f1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 19:15:14 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 04/20/2010 05:05 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>> alloc_pages_exact_node() avoids a branch in a hot path that is checking for
>> something the caller already knows. That's the reason it exists.
>
> Yeah sure but Minchan is trying to tidy up the API by converting
> alloc_pages_node() users to use alloc_pages_exact_node(), at which
> point, the distinction becomes pretty useless. Wouldn't just making
> alloc_pages_node() do what alloc_pages_exact_node() does now and
> converting all its users be simpler? IIRC, the currently planned
> transformation looks like the following.
>
> alloc_pages() -> alloc_pages_any_node()
> alloc_pages_node() -> basically gonna be obsoleted by _exact_node
> alloc_pages_exact_node() -> gonna be used by most NUMA aware allocs
>
> So, let's just make sure no one calls alloc_pages_node() w/ -1 nid,
> kill alloc_pages_node() and rename alloc_pages_exact_node() to
> alloc_pages_node().
Yes. It was a stupid idea. I hope Mel agree this suggestion.
Thanks for careful review, Tejun.
--
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