Re: [Lhms-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/9] add defrag flags

Joel Schopp
2005-09-27T21:01:00Z

> Once this is merged with current Linux, which already has GFP_HARDWALL,
> I presume you will be back up to 21 bits, code and comment.

Looks like it.

>
> As I noted in another message the "USER" and the comment in:
>
> #define __GFP_USER 0x40000u /* User is a userspace user */
>
> are a bit misleading now. Perhaps GFP_EASYRCLM?
>

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet -Romeo

A flag by any other name would work as well -Joel

There are problems with any name we would use. I personally like __GFP_USER
because it is mostly user memory, and nobody will accidently use it to label
something that is not user memory. Those who do use it for non-user memory will
do so with more caution and ridicule. This will keep it from expanding in use
beyond its intent.

If we name it __GFP_EASYRCLM we then start getting into questions about what we
mean by easy and somebody is going to decide that their kernel memory is pretty
easy to reclaim and mess things up. Maybe we could call it
__GPF_REALLYREALLYEASYRCLM to avoid confusion.

If there is a consensus from multiple people for me to go rename the flag
__GFP_xxxxx then I'm not that attached to it and will. But for now I'm going to
leave it __GFP_USER.