* Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2016-08-05 07:47:47]: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:42:08PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > Expand the scope of the existing dma_reserve to accommodate other memory > > reserves too. Accordingly rename variable dma_reserve to > > nr_memory_reserve. > > > > set_memory_reserve also takes a new parameter that helps to identify if > > the current value needs to be incremented. > > > > I think the parameter is ugly and it should have been just > inc_memory_reserve but at least it works. > Yes while the parameter is definitely ugly, the only other use case in arch/x86/kernel/e820.c seems to be written with an intention to set to an absolute value. It was "set_dma_reserve(nr_pages - nr_free_pages)". Both of them nr_pages and nr_free_pages are calculated after walking through the mem blocks. I didnt want to take a chance where someother code path also starts to set reserve value and then the code in e820.c just increments it. However if you still feel strongly about using inc_memory_reserve than set_memory_reserve, I will respin. -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>