On 26/04/17 18:29, Igor Stoppa wrote: > On 26/04/17 17:47, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] >> Also the current mm tree has ___GFP_NOLOCKDEP which is not addressed >> here so I suspect you have based your change on the Linus tree. > I used your tree from kernel.org I found it, I was using master, instead of auto-latest (is it correct?) But now I see something that I do not understand (apologies if I'm asking something obvious). First there is: [...] #define ___GFP_WRITE 0x800000u #define ___GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM 0x1000000u #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP #define ___GFP_NOLOCKDEP 0x4000000u #else #define ___GFP_NOLOCKDEP 0 #endif Then: /* Room for N __GFP_FOO bits */ #define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (25 + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP)) Shouldn't it be either: ___GFP_NOLOCKDEP 0x2000000u or: #define __GFP_BITS_SHIFT (25 + 2 * IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP)) thanks, igor -- 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>
