On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 9:17 AM Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.com> wrote: > > On Fri 11-12-20 15:21:38, Pavel Tatashin wrote: > [...] > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c > > index c2dea9ad0e98..4d8e7f801c66 100644 > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > > @@ -3802,16 +3802,12 @@ alloc_flags_nofragment(struct zone *zone, gfp_t > > gfp_mask) > > return alloc_flags; > > } > > > > -static inline unsigned int current_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, > > - unsigned int alloc_flags) > > +static inline unsigned int cma_alloc_flags(gfp_t gfp_mask, > > + unsigned int alloc_flags) > > Do you have any strong reason to rename? Even though the current
Yes :) > implementation only does something for cma I do not think this is all > that important. The naming nicely fits with current_gfp_context so I > would stick with it. I am renaming because current->flags is removed from this function, therefore keeping the name becomes misleading. This function only addresses cma flag check without looking at the thread local state now. > > Other than that the patch looks reasonable. I would just add a comment > explaining that current_alloc_flags should be called _after_ > current_gfp_context because that one might change the gfp_mask. Thanks, I will add it. > > With that addressed, feel free to add > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.com> Thank you, Pasha
