Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp708986imm; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:35:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpdlN0N9FU+FD5qGFXegbfWGOVIZgj6NA2iM2dMWVDXu0On+rV5jYEfRNHCtu3WInJXg2O08 X-Received: by 2002:a63:231a:: with SMTP id j26-v6mr2790637pgj.138.1532626500664; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:35:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1532626500; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CrvW/27/DmPBg7AO46KigZWIqGvUz4iDTBhB6HH5mt8eOV0h//A5VyZNKNvXk8yL5k b+/z7rJxl7lGko7VY1WUitKj5Ull8GeYCDNt7s2LhRQUNe6XBBLhUo6dFBRUXe9pJ0Ec EuB1urVvrj+nLbYL3Q7xl8IZ7ClMEGSpaqGZlKDVUfnheEnomVUeKJGux0KkR9LoOQQK ecvjcPM1KlPWkLbgXFW60h7absWt8WpY9ukYqc5yd5o17sovVBhvlErJiOyq/iBGzDto xfbYBkxPcs3lO1IenIo0czOx5sznzCdPzGvFKOjtyYrcagoBJhbh0F6INuu2FMz/QyFq 0SEQ== 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=/je72KAE+LA52AngO9WP4x3vmloTZFDG8JYX+cypNic=; b=MB0rEl4HdDZv6H9v6cApJA868beAWDhP6sSEFeLP5Z4KCFtHJ6d7N8VGaxjB8/km5n PJS4shbDvijzGgVmIjAJAhaiqFozZ8FcEArtRWfj7CuksmE7bBQ4yi4jqR2ZDj5LtuJT oDtSGAzBihLHojyE2TRxYLbFIA0mVaxOeJSBMFqZInhb4iQUxFH+zDMW4P6b3in11EvN 67xMef5RrCOat/Y83z1QxCcjaxjJE7v1Ep6+JpIoLCfuvR3Pg2V+H24Yv905JOV/pyCS Lp/W5yIj65PrK6SZW0azI96FF/2fWUFfaCMMDhJgxaGnjNpYKGbiBOyKpGKiWWpGM5Kn gBtA== 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 78-v6si1856578pfn.205.2018.07.26.10.34.45; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 10:35:00 -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 S2388212AbeGZR7b (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 13:59:31 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51974 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730413AbeGZR7b (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 13:59:31 -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 D84F1AE06; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 16:41:51 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 18:41:50 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Jonathan Corbet , Andrew Morton , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] docs/core-api: mm-api: add section about GFP flags Message-ID: <20180726164150.GO28386@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1532607722-17079-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1532607722-17079-8-git-send-email-rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180726130106.GC3504@bombadil.infradead.org> <20180726142039.GA23627@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20180726151852.GF8477@rapoport-lnx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180726151852.GF8477@rapoport-lnx> 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 Thu 26-07-18 18:18:53, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:20:39PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 26-07-18 06:01:06, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 03:22:02PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > +Memory Allocation Controls > > > > +========================== > > > > > > Perhaps call this section "Memory Allocation Flags" instead? > > > > > > > +Linux provides a variety of APIs for memory allocation from direct > > > > +calls to page allocator through slab caches and vmalloc to allocators > > > > +of compressed memory. Although these allocators have different > > > > +semantics and are used in different circumstances, they all share the > > > > +GFP (get free page) flags that control behavior of each allocation > > > > +request. > > > > > > While this isn't /wrong/, I think it might not be the most useful way > > > of explaining what the GFP flags are to someone who's just come across > > > them in some remote part of the kernel. How about this paragraph instead? > > > > > > Functions which need to allocate memory often use GFP flags to express > > > how that memory should be allocated. The GFP acronym stands for "get > > > free pages", the underlying memory allocation function. > > > > OK. > > > > > Not every GFP > > > flag is allowed to every function which may allocate memory. Most > > > users will want to use a plain ``GFP_KERNEL`` or ``GFP_ATOMIC``. > > > > Or rather than mentioning the two just use "Useful GFP flag > > combinations" comment segment from gfp.h > > The comment there includes GFP_DMA, GFP_NOIO etc so I'd prefer Matthew's > version and maybe even omit GFP_ATOMIC from it. > > Some grepping shows that roughly 80% of allocations are GFP_KERNEL, 12% are > GFP_ATOMIC and ... I didn't count the usage of other flags ;-) Well, I will certainly not insist... I don't know who is the expected audience of this documentation. That section was meant for kernel developers to know which of the high level flags to use. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs