On 04/23/2013 10:11 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 12:22:08PM +0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[...]
This patch extends that to also support in-kernel users.
Yup, that is the next logical step. ;-) The patches look good to me, just
one question...
@@ -227,7 +233,7 @@ void vmpressure(gfp_t gfp, struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
* we account it too.
*/
if (!(gfp & (__GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_MOVABLE | __GFP_IO | __GFP_FS)))
I wonder if we want to let kernel users to specify the gfp mask here? The
current mask is good for userspace notifications, but in-kernel users
might be interested in including (or excluding) different types of
allocations, e.g. watch only for DMA allocations pressure?
That is outside of the scope of this patch anyway. For this one, if you
believe it is good, could I have your tag? =)
But answering your question regardless of the scope, I believe the
context of the allocation is an implementation detail of the kernel -
regardless of how widely understood it is. The thing I like the most
about your work, is precisely the fact that is hides the implementation
details so well.
So unless there is a strong use case that would benefit from it, I am
inclined to say this is not wanted.
--
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>