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 17:18:16 +0200 |
| |
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.
Hannes
| |