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

Paul Jackson
2005-09-27T16:26:00Z

Mel wrote:
> > If you have good reason to keep __GFP_USER meanin either user or buffer,
> > then perhaps the name __GFP_USER is misleading.
> >
>
> Possibly but we are stuck for terminology here. It's hard to think of a
> good term that reflects the intention.

You make several good points. How about:
* Rename __GFP_USER to __GFP_EASYRCLM
* Shift the two __GFP_*RCLM flags up to 0x80000u and 0x100000u
* Leave __GFP_BITS_SHIFT at the 21 in your patch (and fix its comment)
(or should we go up the next nibble, to 24?).

This results in the two key GFP defines being:

#define __GFP_EASYRCLM 0x80000u /* Easily reclaimed user or buffer page */
#define __GFP_KERNRCLM 0x100000u /* Reclaimable kernel page */

--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401