From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
mark.rutland@arm.com, mhocko@suse.com, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
mingo@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz, rientjes@google.com,
marc.zyngier@arm.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
shakeelb@google.com, kirill@shutemov.name, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, steve.capper@arm.com,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 15:49:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190112154944.GT6310@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ddd59fdc-3d8f-4015-e851-e7f099193a1b@c-s.fr>
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> As far as I can see,
>
> #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
>
> So what's the difference between:
>
> (GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
>
> and
>
> (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
Nothing. But there's a huge difference in the other parts of that same
file where GFP_ACCOUNT is _not_ used.
I think this unification is too small to bother with. Something I've
had on my todo list for some time and have not done anything about
is to actually unify all of the architecture pte/pmd/... allocations.
There are tricks some architectures use that others would benefit from.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
mark.rutland@arm.com, mhocko@suse.com, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
mingo@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz, rientjes@google.com,
marc.zyngier@arm.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
shakeelb@google.com, kirill@shutemov.name, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, steve.capper@arm.com,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 07:49:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190112154944.GT6310@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ddd59fdc-3d8f-4015-e851-e7f099193a1b@c-s.fr>
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> As far as I can see,
>
> #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
>
> So what's the difference between:
>
> (GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
>
> and
>
> (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
Nothing. But there's a huge difference in the other parts of that same
file where GFP_ACCOUNT is _not_ used.
I think this unification is too small to bother with. Something I've
had on my todo list for some time and have not done anything about
is to actually unify all of the architecture pte/pmd/... allocations.
There are tricks some architectures use that others would benefit from.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, mhocko@suse.com, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com,
linux@armlinux.org.uk, mingo@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
rientjes@google.com,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
marc.zyngier@arm.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
shakeelb@google.com, kirill@shutemov.name, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, steve.capper@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, robin.murphy@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 07:49:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190112154944.GT6310@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ddd59fdc-3d8f-4015-e851-e7f099193a1b@c-s.fr>
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> As far as I can see,
>
> #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
>
> So what's the difference between:
>
> (GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
>
> and
>
> (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
Nothing. But there's a huge difference in the other parts of that same
file where GFP_ACCOUNT is _not_ used.
I think this unification is too small to bother with. Something I've
had on my todo list for some time and have not done anything about
is to actually unify all of the architecture pte/pmd/... allocations.
There are tricks some architectures use that others would benefit from.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, mhocko@suse.com, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
christoffer.dall@arm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com,
linux@armlinux.org.uk, mingo@redhat.com, vbabka@suse.cz,
rientjes@google.com,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
marc.zyngier@arm.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
shakeelb@google.com, kirill@shutemov.name, tglx@linutronix.de,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, steve.capper@arm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, robin.murphy@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 07:49:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190112154944.GT6310@bombadil.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ddd59fdc-3d8f-4015-e851-e7f099193a1b@c-s.fr>
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> As far as I can see,
>
> #define GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ACCOUNT)
>
> So what's the difference between:
>
> (GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
>
> and
>
> (GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO) & ~__GFP_ACCOUNT
Nothing. But there's a huge difference in the other parts of that same
file where GFP_ACCOUNT is _not_ used.
I think this unification is too small to bother with. Something I've
had on my todo list for some time and have not done anything about
is to actually unify all of the architecture pte/pmd/... allocations.
There are tricks some architectures use that others would benefit from.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-12 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-12 10:26 [PATCH] mm: Introduce GFP_PGTABLE Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:38 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 10:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:12 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:56 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 12:55 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 13:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 15:49 ` Matthew Wilcox
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:50 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:40 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:28 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-12 16:48 ` Shakeel Butt
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-13 17:35 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 4:00 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:12 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:00 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 4:00 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-14 7:01 ` Michal Hocko
2019-01-15 14:11 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-15 14:23 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-15 14:11 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-01-15 14:11 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=20190112154944.GT6310@bombadil.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=shakeelb@google.com \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.