Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 12:31:04 -0700
On Monday 06 August 2007 11:17, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
And how do we know a page was taken out of the reserves?
Why not return that in the low bit of the page address? This is a
little more cache efficient, does not leave that odd footprint in the
page union and forces the caller to examine the
alloc_pages(...P_MEMALLOC) return, making it harder to overlook the
fact that it got a page out of reserve and forget to put one back
later.
Regards,
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- References:
- [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- From: Daniel Phillips
- Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- From: Peter Zijlstra
- [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/2] wait for page writeback when directly reclaiming contiguous areas
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 00/23] per device dirty throttling -v8
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 00/10] foundations for reserve-based allocation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|