lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] make GFP_NOTRACK flag unconditional
On Fri, 28 Sep 2012, Glauber Costa wrote:

> There was a general sentiment in a recent discussion (See
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/18/258) that the __GFP flags should be
> defined unconditionally. Currently, the only offender is GFP_NOTRACK,
> which is conditional to KMEMCHECK.
>
> This simple patch makes it unconditional.
>
> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
> CC: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
> CC: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>

Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>

I think it was done this way to show that if CONFIG_KMEMCHECK=n then the
bit could be reused for something else but I can't think of any reason why
that would be useful; what would need to add a gfp bit that would also
happen to depend on CONFIG_KMEMCHECK=n? Nothing comes to mind to save a
bit.

There are other cases of this as well, like __GFP_OTHER_NODE which is only
useful for thp and it's defined unconditionally. So this seems fine to
me.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-10-03 07:41    [W:0.106 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site