Re: [patch 02/18] hugetlb: factor out huge_new_page

[Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>]

On 01.05.2008 [12:23:04 -0700], Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> 
> > Sure, my point was that we already have the nid in the caller (because
> > we specify it along with GFP_THISNODE). So if we pass that nid down into
> > this new function, we shoulnd't need to do the page_to_nid() call,
> > right?
> 
> Right. But its safer the to page_to_nid() there. In case we do an alloc 
> without __GFP_THISNODE in the future.

In this caller, we will require __GFP_THISNODE for the foreseeable
future. Anything that changes that will be more invasive.

The other callsite can pass the page_to_nid() result as the third
argument.

I'm pretty sure when I first created alloc_huge_page_node(), you argued
for me *not* using page_to_nid() on the returned page because we expect
__GFP_THISNODE to do the right thing.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>