[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110925094222.GA11289@liondog.tnic>
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 11:42:22 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Wizard <wizarddewhite@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: Seems the comment of find_next_system_ram() is not exact
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 09:40:52PM +0800, Wizard wrote:
> Hi, Experts
>
> I am a newbie for linux kernel. I just read the code of
> find_next_system_ram() in kernel/resource.c
>
> I think the comment of this function is not exact. This says "Finds
> the lowest memory reosurce exists within [res->start.res->end)".
>
> While I think the code is to find the lowest memory resource overlaps
> [res->start, res->end).
>
> 308: if ((p->end >= start) && (p->start < end))
>
> If I am not correct, please let me know. :)
Right,
hint for the future, do a "git annotate" on the file containing that
code - the patch adding the piece of code might (err, and should!) have
a verbose commit message explaining the situation. And it seems it does
have something to a degree, here's another hint:
58c1b5b079071
:-)
But I agree that the comment over the function could use some more
verbosity on why the function needs to handle overlapping resources and
sections. Let's ask the author.
> BTW, I find the "reosurce" is a typo.
Yes, he could fix it while explaining the overlap :-).
HTH.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
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