Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] hugetlb: add resv argument to hugetlb_file_setup | From | Adam Litke <> | Date | Mon, 26 Mar 2007 09:17:04 -0500 |
| |
On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 15:42 -0700, Ken Chen wrote: > rename hugetlb_zero_setup() to hugetlb_file_setup() to better match > function name convention like shmem implementation. Also add an > argument to the function to indicate whether file setup should reserve > hugetlb page upfront or not. > > Signed-off-by: Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com>
This patch doesn't really look bad at all, but...
I am worried that what might seem nice and clean right now will slowly get worse. This implements an interface on top of another interface (char device on top of a filesystem). What is the next hugetlbfs function that will need a boolean switch to handle a character device special case?
Am I just worrying too much here? Although my pagetable_operations patches aren't the most popular right now, they do have at least one advantage IMO: they enable side-by-side implementation of the interfaces as opposed to stacking them. Keeping them separate removes the need for if ((vm_flags & VM_HUGETLB) && (is_hugetlbfs_chardev())) checking.
-- Adam Litke - (agl at us.ibm.com) IBM Linux Technology Center
- 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/
| |