[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d0b1fec7-cc18-68d2-c574-639e665c137c@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 01:11:00 -0800
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <vbabka@...e.cz>, <mhocko@...e.com>,
<david@...hat.com>, <osalvador@...e.de>,
<dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <sashal@...nel.org>,
<tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>, <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
<mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <jgg@...pe.ca>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<mgorman@...e.de>, <willy@...radead.org>, <rientjes@...gle.com>,
<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/10] selftests/vm: test flag is broken
On 12/18/20 1:06 AM, John Hubbard wrote:
>> Add a new test_flags field, to allow raw gup_flags to work.
>
> I think .test_control_flags field would be a good name, to make it very
> clear that it's not destined for gup_flags. Just .test_flags is not quite
> as clear a distinction from .gup_flags, as .test_control_flags is, IMHO.
>
And maybe renaming .flags to .gup_flags, just to make it really clear.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists