2020년 6월 9일 (화) 오후 10:54, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxxxx>님이 작성: > > On Wed 27-05-20 15:44:58, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > > From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx> > > > > It's not good practice to modify user input. Instead of using it to > > build correct gfp_mask for APIs, this patch introduces another gfp_mask > > field, __gfp_mask, for internal usage. > > Ugh, this is really ugly. It is just hugetlb to add __GFP_THISNODE as a > special case. This is an ugly hack but I do not think we want to work > around it by yet another hack. Moreover it seems that the __GFP_THISNODE > might be not needed anymore as pointed out in a reply to earlier patch. If you mean __GFP_THISNODE handling is ugly, as you pointed out, __GFP_THISNODE handling would be removed in the next version. If you mean introducing __gfp_mask is ugly, I will try to use a local variable to keep modified gfp_mask rather than introducing a field in alloc_control. Thanks.
