From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx116.postini.com [74.125.245.116]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C118B6B004A for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 06:43:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by iajr24 with SMTP id r24so1264798iaj.14 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:43:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 03:43:14 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [RFC] propagate gfp_t to page table alloc functions In-Reply-To: <4F9A0360.3030900@kernel.org> Message-ID: References: <1335171318-4838-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <4F963742.2030607@jp.fujitsu.com> <4F963B8E.9030105@kernel.org> <4F965413.9010305@kernel.org> <20120424143015.99fd8d4a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F973BF2.4080406@jp.fujitsu.com> <4F973FB8.6050103@jp.fujitsu.com> <20120424172554.c9c330dd.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4F98914C.2060505@jp.fujitsu.com> <4F9A0360.3030900@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Minchan Kim Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , Nick Piggin , Ingo Molnar , x86@kernel.org, Hugh Dickins , Johannes Weiner , Rik van Riel , Mel Gorman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Fri, 27 Apr 2012, Minchan Kim wrote: > > Maybe a per-thread_info variant of gfp_allowed_mask? So Andrew's > > set_current_gfp() becomes set_current_gfp_allowed() that does > > > > void set_current_gfp_allowed(gfp_t gfp_mask) > > { > > current->gfp_allowed = gfp_mask & gfp_allowed_mask; > > } > > > > and then the page allocator does > > > > gfp_mask &= current->gfp_allowed; > > > > rather than how it currently does > > > > gfp_mask &= gfp_allowed_mask; > > > > and then the caller of set_current_gfp_allowed() cleans up with > > set_current_gfp_allowed(__GFP_BITS_MASK). > [trimmed the newsgroups from the reply, not sure what the point is?] > Caller should restore old gfp_mask instead of __GFP_BITS_MASK in case of > nesting.And how do we care of atomic context? > Eek, I'm hoping these aren't going to be nested but sure that seems appropraite if they are. (I'm also hoping these will only be either __GFP_HIGH or __GFP_BITS_MASK and no other combinations.) Forcing atomic context would just be set_current_gfp_allowed(__GFP_HIGH). -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org