From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/11] Shared Policy Overview From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: <200706290002.12113.ak@suse.de> References: <20070625195224.21210.89898.sendpatchset@localhost> <200706280001.16383.ak@suse.de> <1183038137.5697.16.camel@localhost> <200706290002.12113.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:14:17 -0400 Message-Id: <1183137257.5012.12.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andi Kleen Cc: Christoph Lameter , "Paul E. McKenney" , linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, nacc@us.ibm.com List-ID: On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 00:02 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > - return __alloc_pages(gfp, 0, zonelist_policy(gfp, pol)); > > + page = __alloc_pages(gfp, 0, zonelist_policy(gfp, pol)); > > + if (pol != &default_policy && pol != current->mempolicy) > > + __mpol_free(pol); > > That destroyed the tail call in the fast path. I would prefer if it > was preserved at least for the default_policy case. This means handling > this in a separated if path. Andi: I could restore the tail call for the common cases of system default and task policy, but that would require a second call to __alloc_pages(), I think, for the shared and vma policies. What do you think about that solution? > > Other than that it looks reasonable and we probably want something > like this for .22. As Christoph notes, this will have to extracted from my series. I think that only get_vma_policy() and alloc_page_vma() need to change for now. I won't get a chance to test anything until the 2nd week in July and that might be too late for .22. Lee -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org