Re: [PATCH 5/7] Fragmentation Avoidance V16: 005_fallback

Dave Hansen
2005-10-05T16:54:24Z

On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 15:46 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> +static struct page *
> +fallback_alloc(int alloctype, struct zone *zone, unsigned int order)
> {
...
> + /*
> + * Here, the alloc type lists has been depleted as well as the global
> + * pool, so fallback. When falling back, the largest possible block
> + * will be taken to keep the fallbacks clustered if possible
> + */
> + while ((alloctype = *(++fallback_list)) != -1) {

That's a bit obtuse. Is there no way to simplify it? Just keeping an
index instead of a fallback_list pointer should make it quite a bit
easier to grok.

-- Dave