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()? >> 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(). Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>