Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 May 2013 09:27:46 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] return value from shrinkers |
| |
On Thu, 16 May 2013 09:52:05 +0200 Oskar Andero <oskar.andero@sonymobile.com> wrote:
> > If we want the capability to return more than a binary yes/no message > > to callers then yes, we could/should enumerate the shrinker return > > values. But as that is a different concept from errnos, it should be > > done with a different and shrinker-specific namespace. > > Agreed, but even if there right now is only a binary return message, is a > hardcoded -1 considered to be acceptable for an interface? IMHO, it is not > very readable nor intuitive for the users of the interface. Why not, as you > mention, add a define or enum in shrinker.h instead, e.g. SHRINKER_STOP or > something.
That sounds OK to me.
| |