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;
Date:   Thu, 26 Jul 2018 20:24:23 +0300
From:   Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        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
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>
 <20180726164150.GO28386@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180726164150.GO28386@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Message-Id: <20180726172423.GA13478@rapoport-lnx>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 06:41:50PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> 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.

Well, as this is kernel api documentation I presume the audience is the
same.
All the descriptions from include/linux/gfp.h are converted by by
kernel-doc and would be included here. This was actually the point of this
patch :)

> -- 
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.