lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: cma: honor __GFP_ZERO flag in cma_alloc()
From
Date
Hi Michal,

On 2018-06-13 15:39, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 13-06-18 05:55:46, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:40:00PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>>> It is not only the matter of the spinlocks. GFP_ATOMIC is not supported
>>> by the
>>> memory compaction code, which is used in alloc_contig_range(). Right, this
>>> should be also noted in the documentation.
>> Documentation is good, asserts are better. The code should reject any
>> flag not explicitly supported, or even better have its own flags type
>> with the few actually supported flags.
> Agreed. Is the cma allocator used for anything other than GFP_KERNEL
> btw.? If not then, shouldn't we simply drop the gfp argument altogether
> rather than give users a false hope for differen gfp modes that are not
> really supported and grow broken code?

Nope, all cma_alloc() callers are expected to use it with GFP_KERNEL gfp
mask.
The only flag which is now checked is __GFP_NOWARN. I can change the
function
signature of cma_alloc to:
struct page *cma_alloc(struct cma *cma, size_t count, unsigned int
align, bool no_warn);

What about clearing the allocated buffer? Should it be another bool
parameter,
done unconditionally or moved to the callers?

Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-02 15:24    [W:0.125 / U:1.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site