On May 2, 2015, at 5:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Summarize OBD_CPT_ALLOC_GFP, OBD_CPT_ALLOC, and OBD_CPT_ALLOC_PTR as a
> function, obd_cpt_alloc.
>
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@lip6.fr>
>
> ---
>
> Some questions: Is the name OK? Is the NULL test needed? If not, should
> the call to kzalloc_node with the call to cfs_cpt_spread_node just be
> inlined into the call sites?
I think we don't need this function at all, we can use kzalloc/kzalloc_node
directly with cfs_cpt_spread_node call in.
What we do need is obd_cpt_alloc_large similar to how we need obd_alloc_large
(I know I still owe you a proper patch with that).
The only differences between the two would then be passing down of the cpt (and
it's use) or not.
Bye,
Oleg
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
