Re: [PATCH] add __GFP_ZERO to GFP_LEVEL_MASK

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:07:51 -0700
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote:

> Then there are some other flags. I am wondering why they are in
> GFP_LEVEL_MASK?
> 
> __GFP_COLD	Does not make sense for slab allocators since we have
> 		to touch the page immediately.
> 
> __GFP_COMP	No effect. Added by the page allocator on their own
> 		if a higher order allocs are used for a slab.
> 
> __GFP_MOVABLE	The movability of a slab is determined by the
> 		options specified at kmem_cache_create time. If this is
> 		specified at kmalloc time then we will have some random
> 		slabs movable and others not. 

Yes, they seem inappropriate.  Especially the first two.
-
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/