[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.11.2003022212090.1344@eggly.anvils>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 22:34:00 -0800 (PST)
From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>
cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/3] mm/vma: Introduce some more VMA flag wrappers
On Mon, 2 Mar 2020, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> This adds the following new VMA flag wrappers which will replace current
> open encodings across various places. This should not have any functional
> implications.
>
> vma_is_dontdump()
> vma_is_noreserve()
> vma_is_special()
> vma_is_locked()
> vma_is_mergeable()
> vma_is_softdirty()
> vma_is_thp()
> vma_is_nothp()
Why?? Please don't. I am not at all keen on your 1/3 and 2/3 (some
of us actually like to see what the VM_ flags are where they're used,
without having to chase through scattered wrappers hiding them),
but this 3/3 particularly upset me.
There is a good reason for the (hideously named) is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma):
to save "#ifdef CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE"s all over (though I suspect the
same could have been achieved much more nicely by #define VM_HUGETLB 0);
but hiding all flags in vma_is_whatever()s is counter-productive churn.
Improved readability? Not to my eyes.
Hugh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists