• N
    mm: fix misleading __GFP_REPEAT related comments · ab857d09
    Nishanth Aravamudan 提交于
    The definition and use of __GFP_REPEAT, __GFP_NOFAIL and __GFP_NORETRY in the
    core VM have somewhat differing comments as to their actual semantics.
    Annoyingly, the flags definition has inline and header comments, which might
    be interpreted as not being equivalent.  Just add references to the header
    comments in the inline ones so they don't go out of sync in the future.  In
    their use in __alloc_pages() clarify that the current implementation treats
    low-order allocations and __GFP_REPEAT allocations as distinct cases.
    
    To clarify, the flags' semantics are:
    
    __GFP_NORETRY means try no harder than one run through __alloc_pages
    
    __GFP_REPEAT means __GFP_NOFAIL
    
    __GFP_NOFAIL means repeat forever
    
    order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER means __GFP_NOFAIL
    Signed-off-by: NNishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
    Acked-by: NMel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
    Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
    Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
    ab857d09
page_alloc.c 125.1 KB