Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp1495699imm; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 02:51:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpezaeAjl8F30gqAC+TJmD0G3E1i44colJDzswqhYLQkgU0Mn2s2q5Q/psKpqvyWGXZKeB+V X-Received: by 2002:a62:5bc3:: with SMTP id p186-v6mr24953293pfb.42.1531216318133; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 02:51:58 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1531216318; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=UfxoT9GM7MDxR5EJHUKonmPM86tX64jxxREr/ocB/p7BcQx+wYK3wl3fqHiAWR4Wq5 83R3M2VZZmE/+5JjhkgfZWmQ6EZbDgm4MH/c7pXB+GjL/5uKpNawqSpXG0hFYzvKyHjj sShhkxBWLx9rF+eSUrbM5caJ6CFKJVsXHAVoJbnEBFybf0POGBx0HsVeJkIJf9slL2KO kxP71qfXyGgtImdmucp73hkjExqxYKL5ju8sHFUD8M40ZB9EEi3a6QqgTHHvQ9kN54mr f+87rbKnK7DLzt1BGx5IRmgSjNVQ5S3ByXiLHKoCwAy/mzDxMi2FOG93z1YNlj9YdNgg xStg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=De+xiV20GwkN9YPvqxWQ9uKkWH5pFdL20bikK9U9eBs=; b=LUziSgLVrL8ju09smvCoooT/FpXQl8L6pIHf9juCxmc4l/AQH8Vh5VfdhVSDbHjrC3 7rQaAWc6S15b9PFSU0i/QmTG6YqDL4XN4sEyh47siYcIbu9ETsYsIOdY/bnyOK2G39Oj o1ptYodUbkBKqfSx46iNXS8DnUqtz82dVOao3ujZc1FZHKQPr8eczq2GBkPBMykCoN0R 1azAovRNYsspvI0ReAht2T2FLml0JVLFgtffDsWdqlunqw0YmEG0wLR25xkYqjd88FOg qQhSEZh4w0nLn7QD770ASkV/48fFxdTXsUnSsjeXg2XKuBpI/SqX9HRtLD53KwPFePwn dQLg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q7-v6si15979258pll.445.2018.07.10.02.51.42; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 02:51:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751370AbeGJJvC (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 05:51:02 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33108 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751194AbeGJJvB (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 05:51:01 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4545AD36; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 11:50:56 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Joonsoo Kim Cc: Marek Szyprowski , Linux Memory Management List , LKML , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Andrew Morton , Michal Nazarewicz , Joonsoo Kim , Vlastimil Babka , Christoph Hellwig , Russell King , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Paul Mackerras , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Chris Zankel , Martin Schwidefsky , Joerg Roedel , Sumit Semwal , Robin Murphy , Laura Abbott , linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/cma: remove unsupported gfp_mask parameter from cma_alloc() Message-ID: <20180710095056.GE14284@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20180709121956.20200-1-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <20180709122019eucas1p2340da484acfcc932537e6014f4fd2c29~-sqTPJKij2939229392eucas1p2j@eucas1p2.samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 10-07-18 16:19:32, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > Hello, Marek. > > 2018-07-09 21:19 GMT+09:00 Marek Szyprowski : > > cma_alloc() function doesn't really support gfp flags other than > > __GFP_NOWARN, so convert gfp_mask parameter to boolean no_warn parameter. > > Although gfp_mask isn't used in cma_alloc() except no_warn, it can be used > in alloc_contig_range(). For example, if passed gfp mask has no __GFP_FS, > compaction(isolation) would work differently. Do you have considered > such a case? Does any of cma_alloc users actually care about GFP_NO{FS,IO}? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs