[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121120121817.cf80b8ad.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:18:17 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Zdenek Kabelac <zkabelac@...hat.com>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Robert Jennings <rcj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD"
On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:18:19 +0400
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 03:37 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h
> > index 02c1c971..d0a7967 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h
> > @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ struct vm_area_struct;
> > #define ___GFP_THISNODE 0x40000u
> > #define ___GFP_RECLAIMABLE 0x80000u
> > #define ___GFP_NOTRACK 0x200000u
> > +#define ___GFP_NO_KSWAPD 0x400000u
> > #define ___GFP_OTHER_NODE 0x800000u
> > #define ___GFP_WRITE 0x1000000u
>
> Keep in mind that this bit has been reused in -mm.
> If this patch needs to be reverted, we'll need to first change
> the definition of __GFP_KMEMCG (and __GFP_BITS_SHIFT as a result), or it
> would break things.
I presently have
/* Plain integer GFP bitmasks. Do not use this directly. */
#define ___GFP_DMA 0x01u
#define ___GFP_HIGHMEM 0x02u
#define ___GFP_DMA32 0x04u
#define ___GFP_MOVABLE 0x08u
#define ___GFP_WAIT 0x10u
#define ___GFP_HIGH 0x20u
#define ___GFP_IO 0x40u
#define ___GFP_FS 0x80u
#define ___GFP_COLD 0x100u
#define ___GFP_NOWARN 0x200u
#define ___GFP_REPEAT 0x400u
#define ___GFP_NOFAIL 0x800u
#define ___GFP_NORETRY 0x1000u
#define ___GFP_MEMALLOC 0x2000u
#define ___GFP_COMP 0x4000u
#define ___GFP_ZERO 0x8000u
#define ___GFP_NOMEMALLOC 0x10000u
#define ___GFP_HARDWALL 0x20000u
#define ___GFP_THISNODE 0x40000u
#define ___GFP_RECLAIMABLE 0x80000u
#define ___GFP_KMEMCG 0x100000u
#define ___GFP_NOTRACK 0x200000u
#define ___GFP_NO_KSWAPD 0x400000u
#define ___GFP_OTHER_NODE 0x800000u
#define ___GFP_WRITE 0x1000000u
and
#define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT 25 /* Room for N __GFP_FOO bits */
#define __GFP_BITS_MASK ((__force gfp_t)((1 << __GFP_BITS_SHIFT) - 1))
Which I think is OK?
I'd forgotten about __GFP_BITS_SHIFT. Should we do this?
--- a/include/linux/gfp.h~a
+++ a/include/linux/gfp.h
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ struct vm_area_struct;
#define ___GFP_NO_KSWAPD 0x400000u
#define ___GFP_OTHER_NODE 0x800000u
#define ___GFP_WRITE 0x1000000u
+/* If the above are modified, __GFP_BITS_SHIFT may need updating */
/*
* GFP bitmasks..
_
--
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