[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110321093412.2776a69f@mschwide.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 09:34:12 +0100
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To: Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@...il.com>
Cc: heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, linux390@...ibm.com,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mitra@...nfotech.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 09/22] mm, s390: add gfp flags variant of pud,
pte, and pte allocations
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 19:56:44 +0000
Prasad Joshi <prasadjoshi124@...il.com> wrote:
> - Added function __crst_table_alloc() which is similar to crst_table_alloc()
> but accepts an extra argument gfp_t. The function uses given allocation
> flag to allocate pages.
>
> - Added a function __page_table_alloc() to allocate page table entries. This
> function is allows caller to specify the page allocation flag. The
> allocation flag is then passed to alloc_page(). The rest of the function is
> copy of the original page_table_alloc().
The approach of this patch series seems straightforward, the only nitpick I
have is the fact that two new functions __crst_table_alloc/__page_table_alloc
are introduced. There aren't many call sites for the two original functions,
namely 4 for crst_table_alloc and 3 for page_table_alloc. Why not add the
gfp flag GFP_KERNEL to these call sites? Then the two additional functions
would not be needed.
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
--
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