Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 04:48:54PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > On 19 May 2017, at 16:28, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:37:38PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > >>> As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague > >>> and gives no hint to what's it's checking for.

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 04:48:54PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > On 19 May 2017, at 16:28, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:37:38PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > >>> As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague > >>> and gives no hint to what's it's checking for.

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Zi Yan
On 19 May 2017, at 16:28, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:37:38PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: >>> As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague >>> and gives no hint to what's it's checking for. It's somewhat tolerable as >>> it is as it's obvious what is being

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Zi Yan
On 19 May 2017, at 16:28, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:37:38PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: >>> As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague >>> and gives no hint to what's it's checking for. It's somewhat tolerable as >>> it is as it's obvious what is being

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:37:38PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > > As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague > > and gives no hint to what's it's checking for. It's somewhat tolerable as > > it is as it's obvious what is being checked but the same is not true with > > the

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:37:38PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > > As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague > > and gives no hint to what's it's checking for. It's somewhat tolerable as > > it is as it's obvious what is being checked but the same is not true with > > the

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Zi Yan
On 19 May 2017, at 12:02, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:43:37PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: From: Naoya Horiguchi Introduce a separate

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Zi Yan
On 19 May 2017, at 12:02, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:43:37PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: From: Naoya Horiguchi Introduce a separate check routine related to

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:43:37PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: > >> From: Naoya Horiguchi > >> > >> Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. > >>

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Mel Gorman
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:43:37PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: > >> From: Naoya Horiguchi > >> > >> Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. > >> This patch just does

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Anshuman Khandual
On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: >> From: Naoya Horiguchi >> >> Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. >> This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change. > > Can you please send it

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-05-19 Thread Anshuman Khandual
On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: >> From: Naoya Horiguchi >> >> Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. >> This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change. > > Can you please send it separately first, this

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-04-20 Thread Anshuman Khandual
On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: > From: Naoya Horiguchi > > Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. > This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change. Can you please send it separately first, this should be debated and merged

Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-04-20 Thread Anshuman Khandual
On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote: > From: Naoya Horiguchi > > Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. > This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change. Can you please send it separately first, this should be debated and merged quickly and not hang on to the

[PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-04-20 Thread Zi Yan
From: Naoya Horiguchi Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change. Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi --- mm/mempolicy.c | 16 +++- 1 file changed, 11

[PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

2017-04-20 Thread Zi Yan
From: Naoya Horiguchi Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag. This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change. Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi --- mm/mempolicy.c | 16 +++- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c