From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail172.messagelabs.com (mail172.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.3]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDFD46B003D for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2009 06:43:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 11:43:54 +0100 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/25] Remove a branch by assuming __GFP_HIGH == ALLOC_HIGH Message-ID: <20090421104354.GS12713@csn.ul.ie> References: <1240266011-11140-13-git-send-email-mel@csn.ul.ie> <20090421180757.F145.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090421193030.F16B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090421193030.F16B.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Linux Memory Management List , Christoph Lameter , Nick Piggin , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Lin Ming , Zhang Yanmin , Peter Zijlstra , Pekka Enberg , Andrew Morton List-ID: On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 07:31:23PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > @@ -1639,8 +1639,8 @@ gfp_to_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask) > > > * policy or is asking for __GFP_HIGH memory. GFP_ATOMIC requests will > > > * set both ALLOC_HARDER (!wait) and ALLOC_HIGH (__GFP_HIGH). > > > */ > > > - if (gfp_mask & __GFP_HIGH) > > > - alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HIGH; > > > + VM_BUG_ON(__GFP_HIGH != ALLOC_HIGH); > > Oops, I forgot said one comment. > BUILD_BUG_ON() is better? > Much better. Thanks > > > > + alloc_flags |= (gfp_mask & __GFP_HIGH); > > > > > > if (!wait) { > > > alloc_flags |= ALLOC_HARDER; > > > > Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro > > > > > > > > > -- Mel Gorman Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab -- 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