Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 09:39:38 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
       "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       minchan.kim@gmail.com, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [RFC mm][PATCH 4/5] add a lowmem check function
Message-Id: <20091211093938.70214f9c.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912101155490.5481@router.home>
References: <20091210163115.463d96a3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
	<20091210170036.dde2c147.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.0912101155490.5481@router.home>
Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1063
Lines: 31

On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:59:11 -0600 (CST)
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> 
> > This patch adds an integer lowmem_zone, which is initialized to -1.
> > If zone_idx(zone) <= lowmem_zone, the zone is lowmem.
> 
> There is already a policy_zone in mempolicy.h. lowmem is if the zone
> number is  lower than policy_zone. Can we avoid adding another zone
> limiter?
> 
My previous version (one month ago) does that. In this set, I tried to use
unified approach for all CONFIG_NUMA/HIGHMEM/flat ones.

Hmm, How about adding following kind of patch after this

#define policy_zone (lowmem_zone + 1)

and remove policy_zone ? I think the name of "policy_zone" implies
"this is for mempolicy, NUMA" and don't think good name for generic use.


Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/