[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <810257c3-216a-d029-9360-508a9aa8c2dd@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 11:36:02 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>, nitesh@...hat.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, david@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: yang.zhang.wz@...il.com, pagupta@...hat.com, riel@...riel.com,
konrad.wilk@...cle.com, lcapitulino@...hat.com,
wei.w.wang@...el.com, aarcange@...hat.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/6] mm: Use zone and order instead of free area in
free_list manipulators
On 6/19/19 3:33 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> - move_to_free_area(page, &zone->free_area[order], migratetype);
> + move_to_free_area(page, zone, order, migratetype);
This certainly looks nicer. But the naming is a bit goofy now because
you're talking about free areas, but there's no free area to be seen.
If anything, isn't it moving to a free_list[]? It's actually going to
zone->free_area[]->free_list[], so the free area seems rather
inconsequential in the entire thing. The (zone/order/migratetype)
combination specifies a free_list[] not a free area anyway.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists