On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 09:29:41AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
quoted text
> > +static struct page *alloc_buddy_huge_page_node(struct hstate *h, int nid)
> > +{
> > +	struct page *page = __alloc_huge_page_node(h, nid);
> >  	if (page) {
> > -		if (arch_prepare_hugepage(page)) {
> > -			__free_pages(page, huge_page_order(h));
> > +		set_compound_page_dtor(page, free_huge_page);
> > +		spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
> > +		h->nr_huge_pages++;
> > +		h->nr_huge_pages_node[nid]++;
> > +		spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> > +		put_page_testzero(page);
> > +	}
> > +	return page;
> > +}
> 
> One would expect the alloc_buddy_huge_page_node() to only differ with
> alloc_buddy_huge_page() in the alloc_pages/alloc_pages_exact_node
> calls. However you implement alloc_buddy_huge_page_node() in a quite
> different way. Can the two functions be unified at all?

Yes. I did it by adding argument @nid to alloc_buddy_huge_page().
Code gets cleaner and work without problems.

Thanks,
Naoya
--
unsubscribe notice
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/