In many places, in the comments, we use both "higher-order" and
"high-order" to describe the non 0-order pages. That is confusing,
because a "higher-order" statement does not reflect what it is compared
with.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240906095049.3486-1-urezki@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@sony.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
break;
/*
- * Higher order allocations must be able to be treated as
+ * High-order allocations must be able to be treated as
* independent small pages by callers (as they can with
* small-page vmallocs). Some drivers do their own refcounting
* on vmalloc_to_page() pages, some use page->mapping,
page_order = vm_area_page_order(area);
/*
- * Higher order nofail allocations are really expensive and
+ * High-order nofail allocations are really expensive and
* potentially dangerous (pre-mature OOM, disruptive reclaim
* and compaction etc.
*