From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx180.postini.com [74.125.245.180]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C7F86B0037 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2013 10:54:29 -0400 (EDT) From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" In-Reply-To: <519BFBA9.7040007@sr71.net> References: <1368321816-17719-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <1368321816-17719-28-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <519BFBA9.7040007@sr71.net> Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 27/39] x86-64, mm: proper alignment mappings with hugepages Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20130625145655.68DCBE0090@blue.fi.intel.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2013 17:56:55 +0300 (EEST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrea Arcangeli , Andrew Morton , Al Viro , Hugh Dickins , Wu Fengguang , Jan Kara , Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Hillf Danton , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dave Hansen wrote: > On 05/11/2013 06:23 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > +static inline unsigned long mapping_align_mask(struct address_space *mapping) > > +{ > > + if (mapping_can_have_hugepages(mapping)) > > + return PAGE_MASK & ~HPAGE_MASK; > > + return get_align_mask(); > > +} > > get_align_mask() appears to be a bit more complicated to me than just a > plain old mask. Are you sure you don't need to pick up any of its > behavior for the mapping_can_have_hugepages() case? get_align_mask() never returns more strict mask then we do in mapping_can_have_hugepages() case. I can modify it this way: unsigned long mask = get_align_mask(); if (mapping_can_have_hugepages(mapping)) mask &= PAGE_MASK & ~HPAGE_MASK; return mask; But it looks more confusing for me. What do you think? -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- 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: email@kvack.org