lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: lowmem_reserve (replaces protection)
On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 01:48:02PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> I see classzone_idx snuck in, can we leave that as alloc_type please?

when I wrote that code in 2.4 it was called class_idx. Just to show it
was not an opaque type, in this 2.6 I called it classzone_idx but it's
the same as class_idx. If you feel classzone_idx is too long I'm sure
fine to rename to class_idx like plain 2.4.

The reason I renamed it is that alloc_type tells nothing to who's
reading the code. That value in the opaque "alloc_type" variable, is
really the classzone_idx that identify the classzone we have to allocate
memory from. Classzone 2 means "all ram is good", classzone 2 means
"zone-normal + zone-dma is good", classzone 0 means "zone-dma is good".

alloc_type means very very little to me, calling it with a meaningful
name made the code more readable for me. gfp_mask describes other alloc
types as well that are not less singificant than the classzone_idx, so I
don't see why we should go back to the opaque variable name when we can
have a more descriptive one.

I'm not going to nitpick further on this detail though, all I care about
is the asm generated and not breaking ABIs with userspace (i.e. at least
one forced rename to the sysctl).

thanks for the review!
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site