[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190726071219.GC6142@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 09:12:19 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Pengfei Li <lpf.vector@...il.com>
Cc: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, vbabka@...e.cz,
aryabinin@...tuozzo.com, osalvador@...e.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mingo@...hat.com, pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com, rppt@...ux.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] make "order" unsigned int
On Fri 26-07-19 07:48:36, Pengfei Li wrote:
[...]
> For the benefit, "order" may be negative, which is confusing and weird.
order = -1 has a special meaning.
> There is no good reason not to do this since it can be avoided.
"This is good because we can do it" doesn't really sound like a
convincing argument to me. I would understand if this reduced a
generated code, made an overall code readability much better or
something along those lines. Also we only use MAX_ORDER range of values
so I could argue that a smaller data type (e.g. short) should be
sufficient for this data type.
Please note that _any_ change, alebit seemingly small, can introduce a
subtle bug. Also each patch requires a man power to review so you have
to understand that "just because we can" is not a strong motivation for
people to spend their time on such a patch.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists