[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTik_yrUkbY+UpA0A9CJcDDXc9kd-MFVhqCNdK_JP@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:24:44 +0800
From: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add vzalloc shortcut
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 09:55:17 +0800 Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Andrew Morton
>> >>
>> >> Also, a slightly better implementation would be
>> >>
>> >> static inline void * vmalloc_node_flags(unsigned long size, gfp_t flags)
>> >> {
>> >> return vmalloc_node(size, 1, flags, PAGE_KERNEL, -1,
>> >> builtin_return_address(0));
>> >> }
>>
>> Is this better? might vmalloc_node_flags would be used by other than vmalloc?
>>
>> static inline void * vmalloc_node_flags(unsigned long size, int node,
>> gfp_t flags)
>
> I have no strong opinions, really. If we add more and more arguments
> to vmalloc_node_flags() it ends up looking like vmalloc_node(), so we
> may as well just call vmalloc_node(). Do whatever feels good ;)
Ok, thanks.
Then I would prefer add 'node' argument due to the function name of
vmalloc_node_flags
--
Regards
dave
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists