> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 07:28:23PM +0200, Michal Nazarewicz wrote: >> If you ask me, I'm not convinced that this improves anything. On Thu, Sep 06 2012, Minchan Kim wrote: > At least, it removes MIGRATE_ISOLATE type in free_area->free_list > which is very irony type as I mentioned. I really don't like such > type in free_area. What's the benefit if we remain code as it is? > It could make more problem in future. I don't really see current situation as making more problems in the future compared to this code. You are introducing a new state for a page (ie. it's not in buddy, but in some new limbo state) and add a bunch of new code and thus bunch of new bugs. I don't see how this improves things over having generic code that handles moving pages between free lists. PS. free_list does exactly what it says on the tin -> the pages are free, ie. unallocated. It does not say that they can be allocated. ;) -- Best regards, _ _ .o. | Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o ..o | Computer Science, Michał “mina86” Nazarewicz (o o) ooo +----<email/xmpp: mpn@xxxxxxxxxx>--------------ooO--(_)--Ooo--
Attachment:
pgpIeCCMft3uL.pgp
Description: PGP signature