[PATCH v1 4/6] mm/page_alloc: sort out the alloc_contig_range() gfp flags mess
Zi Yan
ziy at nvidia.com
Tue Dec 3 05:25:57 AEDT 2024
On 2 Dec 2024, at 7:58, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> It's all a bit complicated for alloc_contig_range(). For example, we don't
> support many flags, so let's start bailing out on unsupported
> ones -- ignoring the placement hints, as we are already given the range
> to allocate.
>
> While we currently set cc.gfp_mask, in __alloc_contig_migrate_range() we
> simply create yet another GFP mask whereby we ignore the reclaim flags
> specify by the caller. That looks very inconsistent.
>
> Let's clean it up, constructing the gfp flags used for
> compaction/migration exactly once. Update the documentation of the
> gfp_mask parameter for alloc_contig_range() and alloc_contig_pages().
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david at redhat.com>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy at nvidia.com>
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list