linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 19:21:22 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <z2p28c262361004150321sc65e84b4w6cc99927ea85a52b@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BC6E581.1000604@kernel.org>

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 04/15/2010 06:40 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> I'm not an expert on that part of the kernel but isn't
>>> alloc_pages_any_node() identical to alloc_pages_exact_node()?  All
>>
>> alloc_pages_any_node means user allows allocated pages in any
>> node(most likely current node) alloc_pages_exact_node means user
>> allows allocated pages in nid node if he doesn't use __GFP_THISNODE.
>
> Ooh, sorry, I meant alloc_pages().  What would be the difference
> between alloc_pages_any_node() and alloc_pages()?

It's no different. It's same. Just naming is more explicit. :)
I think it could be following as.

#define alloc_pages alloc_pages_any_node.
strucdt page * alloc_pages_node() {
   int nid = numa_node_id();
   ...
   return page;
}

>
>>> introducing new API just to weed out invalid usages seems like an
>>> overkill.
>>
>> It might be.
>>
>> It think it's almost same add_to_page_cache and add_to_page_cache_locked.
>> If user knows the page is already locked, he can use
>> add_to_page_cache_locked for performance gain and code readability
>> which we need to lock the page before calling it.
>
> Yeah, if both APIs are necessary at the end of the conversion, sure.
> I was just saying that introducing new APIs just to weed out invalid
> usages and then later killing the old API would be rather excessive.
>
> I was just wondering whether we could just clean up alloc_pages_node()
> users and kill alloc_pages_exact_node().

kill alloc_pages_exact_node?
Sorry but I can't understand your point.
I don't want to kill user of alloc_pages_exact_node.
That's opposite.
I want to kill user of alloc_pages_node and change it with
alloc_pages_any_node or alloc_pages_exact_node. :)

I think we can do it. That's because all of caller already can check nid == -1
before calling allocation function explicitly if he cares node locality.

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-15 10:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-13 15:24 [PATCH 1/6] Remove node's validity check in alloc_pages Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:24 ` [PATCH 2/6] change alloc function in pcpu_alloc_pages Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:48   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14 23:39     ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  1:31       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  7:21         ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  8:00           ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15  8:15             ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15  9:40               ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 10:08                 ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15 10:21                   ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2010-04-15 10:33                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-15 11:43                     ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-15 11:49                       ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-16 16:07                         ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-16 19:13                           ` Lee Schermerhorn
2010-04-18 15:55                             ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-18 15:54                           ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-18 21:22                             ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-19  0:03                               ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-19 17:45                                 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-20  0:20                                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-19 17:38                             ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-19 22:27                               ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-20 15:05                                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-21 10:48                                   ` Tejun Heo
2010-04-22 10:15                                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-21 14:15                                   ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-21 17:06                                     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 3/6] change alloc function in alloc_slab_page Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:52   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:01     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:14       ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 21:37   ` David Rientjes
2010-04-13 23:40     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 23:55       ` David Rientjes
2010-04-14  0:02         ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-14  0:18   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14 12:23     ` Pekka Enberg
2010-04-16 16:10       ` Christoph Lameter
2010-04-18 18:49         ` Pekka Enberg
2010-04-19  9:05         ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 4/6] change alloc function in vmemmap_alloc_block Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:59   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14  0:19   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 5/6] change alloc function in __vmalloc_area_node Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:02   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-14  0:22   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-04-14  0:33     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:25 ` [PATCH 6/6] Add comment in alloc_pages_exact_node Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 16:13   ` Mel Gorman
2010-04-13 16:20     ` Minchan Kim
2010-04-13 15:32 ` [PATCH 1/6] Remove node's validity check in alloc_pages Mel Gorman
2010-04-14  0:04 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=z2p28c262361004150321sc65e84b4w6cc99927ea85a52b@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lliubbo@gmail.com \
    --cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).