[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200708072132.GE16543@js1304-desktop>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 16:21:33 +0900
From: Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@....com,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/11] mm/gup: use a standard migration target
allocation callback
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 01:46:14PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 07-07-20 16:44:45, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> [...]
> > @@ -1551,9 +1552,12 @@ struct page *alloc_migration_target(struct page *page, unsigned long private)
> >
> > gfp_mask |= htlb_alloc_mask(h);
> > return alloc_huge_page_nodemask(h, nid, mtc->nmask,
> > - gfp_mask, false);
> > + gfp_mask, mtc->skip_cma);
> > }
> >
> > + if (mtc->skip_cma)
> > + flags = memalloc_nocma_save();
> > +
>
> As already mentioned in previous email this is a completely wrong usage
> of the scope API. The scope should be defined by the caller and this
> should be all transparent by the allocator layer.
Okay. Like as newly sent patch for 04/11, this patch will also be changed.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists