Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 19 Apr 2010 06:22:20 +0900 | From | Tejun Heo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages |
| |
On 04/19/2010 12:54 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: >> alloc_pages is the same as alloc_pages_any_node so why have it? > > I don't want to force using '_node' postfix on UMA users. > Maybe they don't care getting page from any node and event don't need to > know about _NODE_.
Yeah, then, remove alloc_pages_any_node(). I can't really see the point of any_/exact_node. alloc_pages() and alloc_pages_node() are fine and in line with other functions. Why change it?
>> Why remove it? If you want to get rid of -1 handling then check all the > > alloc_pages_node have multiple meaning as you said. So some of users > misuses that API. I want to clear intention of user.
The name is fine. Just clean up the users and make the intended usage clear in documentation and implementation (ie. trigger a big fat warning) and make all the callers use named constants instead of -1 for special meanings.
Thanks.
-- tejun
| |