On 05/11/2013 06:23 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > ramfs is the most simple fs from page cache point of view. Let's start > transparent huge page cache enabling here. > > For now we allocate only non-movable huge page. ramfs pages cannot be > moved yet. > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/ramfs/inode.c | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/ramfs/inode.c b/fs/ramfs/inode.c > index c24f1e1..54d69c7 100644 > --- a/fs/ramfs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/ramfs/inode.c > @@ -61,7 +61,11 @@ struct inode *ramfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb, > inode_init_owner(inode, dir, mode); > inode->i_mapping->a_ops = &ramfs_aops; > inode->i_mapping->backing_dev_info = &ramfs_backing_dev_info; > - mapping_set_gfp_mask(inode->i_mapping, GFP_HIGHUSER); > + /* > + * TODO: make ramfs pages movable > + */ > + mapping_set_gfp_mask(inode->i_mapping, > + GFP_TRANSHUGE & ~__GFP_MOVABLE); So, before these patches, ramfs was movable. Now, even on architectures or configurations that have no chance of using THP-pagecache, ramfs pages are no longer movable. Right? That seems unfortunate, and probably not something we want to intentionally merge in this state. Worst-case, we should at least make sure the pages remain movable in configurations where THP-pagecache is unavailable. -- 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>