linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/10] vmscan: move priority variable into scan

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100416224820.GE20640@cmpxchg.org>
Date:	Sat, 17 Apr 2010 00:48:20 +0200
From:	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] vmscan: move priority variable into scan_control

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 06:21:35PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
> 
> Now very lots function in vmscan have `priority' argument. It consume
> stack slightly. To move it on struct scan_control reduce stack.

I don't like this much because it obfuscates value communication.

Functions no longer have obvious arguments and return values, as it's all
passed hidden in that struct.

Do you think it's worth it?  I would much rather see that thing die than
expand on it...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/