From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:48:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH v6][RFC] Fix hugetlb pool allocation with empty nodes In-Reply-To: <20070612033050.GR3798@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20070612001542.GJ14458@us.ibm.com> <20070612021245.GH3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612023421.GL3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612031718.GP3798@us.ibm.com> <20070612033050.GR3798@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nishanth Aravamudan Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > Export a function for the interleave functionality so that we do not > > have to replicate the same thing in various locations in the kernel. > > But I don't understand this at all. > > This is *not* generically available, unless every caller has its own > private static variable. I don't know how to do that in C. It is already there. Each task has a il_next field in its task struct for that purpose. > You're asking me to complicate patches that work just fine right now. I am trying to simplify your work. -- 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