Re: [PATCH 03/05] mm rationalize __alloc_pages ALLOC_* flag names

Nick Piggin
2005-11-15T09:55:51Z

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