[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131205185116.GA27274@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:51:16 -0500
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Strashko, Grygorii" <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Cc: "Shilimkar, Santosh" <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/23] mm/memblock: Add memblock memory allocation apis
Hey,
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 06:48:21PM +0000, Strashko, Grygorii wrote:
> +/* Fall back to all the existing bootmem APIs */
> +#define memblock_virt_alloc(x) \
> + __alloc_bootmem(x, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, BOOTMEM_LOW_LIMIT)
>
> which will be transformed to
> +/* Fall back to all the existing bootmem APIs */
> +#define memblock_virt_alloc(x, align) \
> + __alloc_bootmem(x, align, BOOTMEM_LOW_LIMIT)
>
> and used as
>
> memblock_virt_alloc(size, 0);
>
> so, by default bootmem code will use 0 as default alignment and not SMP_CACHE_BYTES
> and that is wrong.
Just translate it to SMP_CACHE_BYTES? Am I missing something here?
You're defining a new API which wraps around two interfaces. Wrap
them so that they show the same desired behavior?
--
tejun
--
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