On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 10:02:49AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 12/20/2014 11:44 AM, Rafael Aquini wrote: > >> > > >> > It would be simpler to include this unconditionally. Otherwise you > >> > are forcing everybody parsing the file and trying to run calculations > >> > of it to check for its presence, and then have them fall back and get > >> > the value from somewhere else if not. > > I'm fine either way, it makes the change even simpler. Also, if we > > decide to get rid of page_size != PAGE_SIZE condition I believe we can > > also get rid of that "huge" hint being conditionally printed out too. > > That would break existing users of the "huge" flag. That makes it out > of the question, right? > Yeah, but it sort of follows the same complaint Johannes did for the conditional page size printouts. If we start to print out page size deliberately for each map regardless their backing pages being PAGE_SIZE long or bigger, I don't see much point on keep conditionally printing out the 'huge' hint out. As I said before, I'm fine either way though I think we can keep the current behaviour, and just disambiguate page sizes != PAGE_SIZE as in the current proposal. Looking forward more of your thoughts! Cheers, -- Rafael -- 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>