[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <986271f68d114a7daeacae620e3a6fdf@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 14:52:12 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Michal Hocko' <mhocko@...e.com>,
Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 1/1] mm: provide one common K(x) macro
From: Michal Hocko
> Sent: 01 September 2021 12:11
>
> On Wed 01-09-21 12:50:40, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> [...]
> > ```
> > 31 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 90 deletions(-)
> > ```
> >
> > which is not that horrible.
>
> Still a lot of churn to my taste for something that is likely a matter
> of personal preferences and taste. Consider additional costs as well.
> E.g. go over additional git blame steps to learn why the code has been
> introduced, review bandwith etc...
Not to mention the time taken by someone scan-reading the
code who has to go and find the definition of K() just
to see what it does.
A more descriptive name (eg PAGES_TO_KB) might save that.
but is it worth it?
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists