linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node

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: <20170519160205.hkte6tlw26lfn74h@techsingularity.net>
Date:   Fri, 19 May 2017 17:02:05 +0100
From:   Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To:     Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Zi Yan <zi.yan@...t.com>, n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, minchan@...nel.org,
        vbabka@...e.cz, mhocko@...nel.org, zi.yan@...rutgers.edu,
        dnellans@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] mm: mempolicy: add queue_pages_node_check()

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 06:43:37PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 04/21/2017 09:34 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> > On 04/21/2017 02:17 AM, Zi Yan wrote:
> >> From: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
> >>
> >> Introduce a separate check routine related to MPOL_MF_INVERT flag.
> >> This patch just does cleanup, no behavioral change.
> > 
> > Can you please send it separately first, this should be debated
> > and merged quickly and not hang on to the series if we have to
> > respin again.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Mel/Andrew,
> 
> This does not have any functional changes and very much independent.
> Can this clean up be accepted as is ? In that case we will have to
> carry one less patch in the series which can make the review process
> simpler.
> 

As you say, there is no functional change but the helper name is vague
and gives no hint to what's it's checking for. It's somewhat tolerable as
it is as it's obvious what is being checked but the same is not true with
the helper name.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs