[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37a0a866-b7df-4cf1-9d0a-02f04c06a21d@lucifer.local>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2023 12:13:42 +0000
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: prefer xxx_page() alloc/free functions for order-0
pages
On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 10:24:47AM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:27:14PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > Update instances of alloc_pages(..., 0), __get_free_pages(..., 0) and
> > __free_pages(..., 0) to use alloc_page(), __get_free_page() and
> > __free_page() respectively in core code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@...nel.org>
>
> But why limit this only to mm?
I wanted to keep things 'polite' and within mm to begin with, I may follow up
with a scout around other areas of the kernel.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists