From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 18:44:06 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Cleanup of __alloc_pages Message-Id: <20051107184406.3179757c.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1131416195.20471.31.camel@akash.sc.intel.com> References: <20051107174349.A8018@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <20051107175358.62c484a3.akpm@osdl.org> <1131416195.20471.31.camel@akash.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rohit Seth Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Rohit Seth wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 17:53 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > "Rohit, Seth" wrote: > > > > > > [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages. Couple of difference from original behavior: > > > 1- remove the initial reclaim logic > > > 2- GFP_HIGH pages are allowed to go little below watermark sooner. > > > 3- Search for free pages unconditionally after direct reclaim. > > > > Would it be possible to break these into three separate patches? The > > cleanup part should be #1. > > > > Doing the above three things as part of this clean up patch makes the > code look extra clean... With separate patches the changes can be better understood, and they can be selectively dropped, and people looking for regressions with `git bisect' will be able to pinpoint the source more accurately. > Is there any specific issue coming out of 2 & 3 > above. I haven't looked yet - all the changes are mixed together ;) -- 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