On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 12:47:30 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 27-03-19 10:29:58, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > snd_malloc_pages() and snd_free_pages() are merely thin wrappers of > > the standard page allocator / free functions. Even the arguments are > > compatible with some standard helpers, so there is little merit of > > keeping these wrappers. > > > > This patch replaces the all existing callers of snd_malloc_pages() and > > snd_free_pages() with the direct calls of the standard helper > > functions. In this version, we use a recently introduced one, > > alloc_pages_exact(), which suits better than the old > > snd_malloc_pages() implementation for our purposes. Then we can avoid > > the waste of pages by alignment to power-of-two. > > > > Since alloc_pages_exact() does split pages, we need no longer > > __GFP_COMP flag; or better to say, we must not pass __GFP_COMP to > > alloc_pages_exact(). So the former unconditional addition of > > __GFP_COMP flag in snd_malloc_pages() is dropped, as well as in most > > other places. > > I haven't checked all the callers but the replacement makes sense to me. > I am just wondering whether there is any hard requireemet to have all > those requests to be physically contiguous or kvmalloc would suit them > better. Most of callers are supposed to allocate buffers that can be also mmapped to user-space, so kvmalloc() won't work. So, the explicit page allocations are on purpose. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
