lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-05-16 19:01    [W:0.152 / U:0.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site