Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Oct 2012 22:00:19 -0700 (PDT) | From | David Rientjes <> | Subject | Re: [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.
| |