On Wed 16-10-19 14:29:05, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 16.10.19 13:51, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Wed 16-10-19 16:43:57, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 10/16/2019 04:39 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > [...] > > > > Just to make sure, you ignored my comment regarding alignment > > > > although I explicitly mentioned it a second time? Thanks. > > > > > > I had asked Michal explicitly what to be included for the respin. Anyways > > > seems like the previous thread is active again. I am happy to incorporate > > > anything new getting agreed on there. > > > > Your patch is using the same alignment as the original code would do. If > > an explicit alignement is needed then this can be added on top, right? > > > > Again, the "issue" I see here is that we could now pass in numbers that are > not a power of two. For gigantic pages it was clear that we always have a > number of two. The alignment does not make any sense otherwise. > > What I'm asking for is > > a) Document "The resulting PFN is aligned to nr_pages" and "nr_pages should > be a power of two". OK, this makes sense. > b) Eventually adding something like > > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!is_power_of_2(nr_pages))) > return NULL; I am not sure this is really needed. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
