Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Feb 2006 20:06:13 +0100 | From | "Jesper Juhl" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH -mm 1/2] mm: make shrink_all_memory overflow-resistant |
| |
On 2/27/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote: > On Po 27-02-06 19:53:47, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > On 2/27/06, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote: > > > Make shrink_all_memory() overflow-resistant. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> > > > --- > > > include/linux/swap.h | 2 +- > > > mm/vmscan.c | 9 +++++---- > > > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > Index: linux-2.6.16-rc4-mm2/mm/vmscan.c > > > =================================================================== > > > --- linux-2.6.16-rc4-mm2.orig/mm/vmscan.c > > > +++ linux-2.6.16-rc4-mm2/mm/vmscan.c > > > @@ -1785,18 +1785,19 @@ void wakeup_kswapd(struct zone *zone, in > > > * Try to free `nr_pages' of memory, system-wide. Returns the number of freed > > > * pages. > > > */ > > > -int shrink_all_memory(unsigned long nr_pages) > > > +unsigned long shrink_all_memory(unsigned int nr_pages) > > > > What about the callers of shrink_all_memory() who currently expect it > > to return an int, have you checked how they will react to you changing > > the return type (and signedness) ? > > That's okay, we checked all 3 callers :-).
I'm sure you did, I'm not saying you didn't. All I'm asking for is a short explanation of why the changes the patch makes are correct since that's not obvious to me, and I'd like to understand the patch.
-- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - 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/
| |