From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A5DB6B01FE for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:08:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:07:55 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <9918f566ab0259356cded31fd1dd80da6cae0c2b.1271171877.git.minchan.kim@gmail.com> <4BC65237.5080408@kernel.org> <4BC6BE78.1030503@kernel.org> <4BC6CB30.7030308@kernel.org> <4BC6E581.1000604@kernel.org> <4BC6FBC8.9090204@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Minchan Kim Cc: Tejun Heo , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Bob Liu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Minchan Kim wrote: > I don't want to remove alloc_pages for UMA system. alloc_pages is the same as alloc_pages_any_node so why have it? > #define alloc_pages alloc_page_sexact_node > > What I want to remove is just alloc_pages_node. :) Why remove it? If you want to get rid of -1 handling then check all the callsites and make sure that they are not using -1. Also could you define a constant for -1? -1 may have various meanings. One is the local node and the other is any node. The difference is if memory policies are obeyed or not. Note that alloc_pages follows memory policies whereas alloc_pages_node does not. Therefore alloc_pages() != alloc_pages_node( , -1) -- 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