[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170313124500.ffc91fa4d4077719928e3274@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:45:00 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<kernel-team@....com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 09/10] mm: make rmap_one boolean function
On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 09:35:52 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
> rmap_one's return value controls whether rmap_work should contine to
> scan other ptes or not so it's target for changing to boolean.
> Return true if the scan should be continued. Otherwise, return false
> to stop the scanning.
>
> This patch makes rmap_one's return value to boolean.
"SWAP_AGAIN" conveys meaning to the reader, whereas the meaning of
"true" is unclear. So it would be better to document the return value
of these functions.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists