From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 20:01:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: A solution for more GFP_xx flags? In-Reply-To: <45061F16.202@yahoo.com.au> Message-ID: References: <45061F16.202@yahoo.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Nick Piggin wrote: > This seems like a decent approach to make a nice general interface. I guess > existing APIs can be easily implemented by filling in the structure. If you > took this approach I don't think there should be any objections. > > A minor point: would we prefer a struct argument to the allocator, or more > function arguments? It is an API that we need to get right... If you look at my allocator API (see the latest slab patchset), one could add all the allocator methods into the struct in order to objectivize the page alloator. The logical first step towards that would be to have a struct argument to allow detailed allocation control and to avoid this contextual memory policy / cpuset mess. -- 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