Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1589764857-6800-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
 <1589764857-6800-4-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <20200521004324.GB317575@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200521004324.GB317575@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
From:   Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 May 2020 10:20:41 +0900
Message-ID: <CAAmzW4PomH2nL9M1G9A3g0fkMUtsizhZ6w-x4909z=NOx23iWw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] mm/hugetlb: introduce alloc_control structure to
 simplify migration target allocation APIs
To:     Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, kernel-team@lge.com,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

2020=EB=85=84 5=EC=9B=94 21=EC=9D=BC (=EB=AA=A9) =EC=98=A4=EC=A0=84 9:43, R=
oman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>=EB=8B=98=EC=9D=B4 =EC=9E=91=EC=84=B1:
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 10:20:49AM +0900, js1304@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> >
> > Currently, page allocation functions for migration requires some argume=
nts.
> > More worse, in the following patch, more argument will be needed to uni=
fy
> > the similar functions. To simplify them, in this patch, unified data
> > structure that controls allocation behaviour is introduced.
>
> Is it all about huge pages only? If so, maybe adding huge_page suffix/pre=
fix
> to struct alloc_control? E.g. huge_alloc_control or something like this.

No, it will be used for other migration target allocation functions. You ca=
n
see it on following patches.

> >
> > For clean-up, function declarations are re-ordered.
> >
> > Note that, gfp_mask handling on alloc_huge_page_(node|nodemask) is
> > slightly changed, from ASSIGN to OR. It's safe since caller of these
> > functions doesn't pass extra gfp_mask except htlb_alloc_mask().
>
> Changes make sense to me, but it feels like this patch is doing several
> thing simultaneously. Do you mind splitting it into few?

I will try to split it on next spin.

Thanks.