On 3/27/20 10:24 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On 27/03/2020 12:21, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> Because the two variants are rather pointless. And this might get >> more people to actually pass a useful node ID instead of copy and >> pasting some old example code. > > So then everybody will copy the NUMA_NO_NODE ones and in X years someone > will come up with a wrapper passing in NUMA_NO_NODE to > blk_alloc_queue_node(), because he/she didn't read the commit history. If you care about numa-node, then you are generally using it for other allocations as well, so it should come naturally. If you don't, then the copy/paste is fine. Better to expose it as the main API, so people don't miss it. -- Jens Axboe
