On 10/14/2019 10:22 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote: > On 10/14/19 6:08 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> On 10/14/2019 06:30 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> >>> OK, thanks for the clarification. This all means that this patch is not >>> the right approach. If you need a more generic alloc_contig_range then >>> add it to page_alloc.c and make it completely independent on the hugetlb >>> config and the code. Hugetlb allocator can reuse that helper. > > Should we revisit this previous attempt at such an interface? > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/16/1072 > > This looks like another use case. > The current proposal [v6] does not go far enough to unify all callers of alloc_contig_range() looking for contiguous pages of certain size, but instead it just tries not to duplicate HugeTLB gigantic allocation code in the test case for it's purpose.
