Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages

Rohit wrote:
> Not sure why?  Let me see if some new values could better articulate the
> meaning. 

See also Nick's comments, before going too far.  He was advocating
just using binary flags and adding a gfp_high flag, or something
like that.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
    • From: "Rohit, Seth" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
    • From: Rohit Seth <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Linux-NTFS-Dev] [2.6-GIT] NTFS: Release 2.1.25.
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH][MCAST]IPv6: doubt about ipv6_sk_mc_lock usage.
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
• Next by thread: RE: [PATCH]: Clean up of __alloc_pages
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]