From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: pj@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Simon.Derr@bull.net, clameter@sgi.com, rohit.seth@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/05] mm rationalize __alloc_pages ALLOC_* flag names
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 20:55:51 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4379B0A7.3090803@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051115010303.6bc04222.akpm@osdl.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Paul Jackson wrote:
>>
>>>Rationalize mm/page_alloc.c:__alloc_pages() ALLOC flag names.
>>>
>>
>>I don't really see the need for this. The names aren't
>>clearly better, and the downside is that they move away
>>from the terminlogy we've been using in the page allocator
>>for the past few years.
>
>
> I thought they were heaps better, actually.
>
Some? Alot? Musthave?
To me it just changed the manner in which the hands are waving.
Actually, I like the current names because ALLOC_HIGH explicitly
is used for __GFP_HIGH allocations, and MUSTHAVE is not really
an improvement on NO_WATERMARKS.
However if you'd really like to change the names, I'd prefer them
to be more consistent, eg:
ALLOC_DIP_NONE
ALLOC_DIP_LESS
ALLOC_DIP_MORE
ALLOC_DIP_FULL
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: pj@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Simon.Derr@bull.net, clameter@sgi.com, rohit.seth@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/05] mm rationalize __alloc_pages ALLOC_* flag names
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 20:55:51 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4379B0A7.3090803@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051115010303.6bc04222.akpm@osdl.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>>Paul Jackson wrote:
>>
>>>Rationalize mm/page_alloc.c:__alloc_pages() ALLOC flag names.
>>>
>>
>>I don't really see the need for this. The names aren't
>>clearly better, and the downside is that they move away
>>from the terminlogy we've been using in the page allocator
>>for the past few years.
>
>
> I thought they were heaps better, actually.
>
Some? Alot? Musthave?
To me it just changed the manner in which the hands are waving.
Actually, I like the current names because ALLOC_HIGH explicitly
is used for __GFP_HIGH allocations, and MUSTHAVE is not really
an improvement on NO_WATERMARKS.
However if you'd really like to change the names, I'd prefer them
to be more consistent, eg:
ALLOC_DIP_NONE
ALLOC_DIP_LESS
ALLOC_DIP_MORE
ALLOC_DIP_FULL
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-11-15 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-14 4:03 [PATCH 01/05] mm fix __alloc_pages cpuset ALLOC_* flags Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:03 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:03 ` [PATCH 02/05] mm simplify " Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:03 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:03 ` [PATCH 03/05] mm rationalize __alloc_pages ALLOC_* flag names Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:03 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-15 9:00 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-15 9:00 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-15 9:03 ` Andrew Morton
2005-11-15 9:03 ` Andrew Morton
2005-11-15 9:55 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2005-11-15 9:55 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-15 19:20 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-15 19:20 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-15 9:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-11-15 9:59 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-11-15 9:18 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-15 9:18 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:04 ` [PATCH 04/05] mm simplify __alloc_pages cpuset hardwall logic Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:04 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:04 ` [PATCH 05/05] mm GFP_ATOMIC comment Paul Jackson
2005-11-14 4:04 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-15 8:52 ` [PATCH 01/05] mm fix __alloc_pages cpuset ALLOC_* flags Nick Piggin
2005-11-15 8:52 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-15 9:50 ` Paul Jackson
2005-11-15 9:50 ` Paul Jackson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4379B0A7.3090803@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=Simon.Derr@bull.net \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=rohit.seth@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.