[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111101184759.GE14998@csn.ul.ie>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 18:47:59 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
To: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Ankita Garg <ankita@...ibm.com>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Jesse Barker <jesse.barker@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Shariq Hasnain <shariq.hasnain@...aro.org>,
Chunsang Jeong <chunsang.jeong@...aro.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] mm: alloc_contig_freed_pages() added
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 07:06:56PM +0100, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
> >page_isolation.c may also be a better fit than page_alloc.c
>
> Since isolate_freepages_block() is the only user of split_free_page(),
> would it make sense to move split_free_page() to page_isolation.c as
> well? I sort of like the idea of making it static and removing from
> header file.
>
I see no problem with that. It'll be separate from split_page() but that
is not earth shattering.
Thanks.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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