Messages in this thread | | | From | Johannes Weiner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: rename PTE_MASK to PTE_PFN_MASK | Date | Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:23:59 +0200 |
| |
Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de> writes:
> Hi, > > Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> writes: > >> Johannes Weiner wrote: >>> PTE_PFN_MASK is not symmetric to PAGE_MASK. >> >> No, it isn't. Is there anything about the name that suggests that it >> should be? PTE_PFN_MASK is for operating on pteval_t-typed values >> extracted from ptes; PAGE_MASK is for operating on addresses. > > I meant the naming scheme, not the functionality. > > The thing PAGE_MASK and PTE_MASK have in common is that they are masks > and their names indicate what is masked away when applied. > > So PAGE_MASK suggests that it masks out page details. And PTE_MASK > suggests that it masks out PTE details. > > PTE_PFN_MASK masks suggests that it masks out the flags, according to > the existing naming convention. But it does the opposite.
As you explained me how PAGE_MASK was meant, scratch the above ;)
Hannes
| |