On 01/13/2019 11:05 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Sat 12-01-19 15:56:38, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> All architectures have been defining their own PGALLOC_GFP as (GFP_KERNEL | >> __GFP_ZERO) and using it for allocating page table pages. This causes some >> code duplication which can be easily avoided. GFP_KERNEL allocated and >> cleared out pages (__GFP_ZERO) are required for page tables on any given >> architecture. This creates a new generic GFP flag flag which can be used >> for any page table page allocation. Does not cause any functional change. > > I agree that some unification is due but GFP_PGTABLE is not something to > expose in generic gfp.h IMHO. It just risks an abuse. I would be looking Why would you think that it risks an abuse ? It does not create new semantics of allocation in the buddy. Its just uses existing GFP_KERNEL allocation which is then getting zeroed out. The risks (if any) is exactly same as GFP_KERNEL. > at providing asm-generic implementation and reuse it to remove the code Does that mean GFP_PGTABLE can be created but not in gfp.h but in some other memory related header file ? > duplication. But I haven't tried that to know that it will work out due > to small/subtle differences between arches. IIUC from the allocation perspective GFP_ACCOUNT is the only thing which gets added with GFP_PGTABLE for user page table for memcg accounting purpose. There does not seem to be any other differences unless I am missing something. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
