[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d9d58b20-5ce5-ebfd-bcfa-523086b66739@cybernetics.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2022 12:08:54 -0500
From: Tony Battersby <tonyb@...ernetics.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@...a.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...a.com>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 11/11] dmapool: link blocks across pages
On 12/23/22 11:58, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 12:16:25PM -0800, Keith Busch wrote:
>> unsigned int size;
>> unsigned int allocation;
>> unsigned int boundary;
>> + size_t nr_blocks;
>> + size_t nr_active;
>> + size_t nr_pages;
> Should these be unsigned int like the counters above?
I previously recommended that they should be size_t because they are
counting the number of objects in the entire pool, which can be greater
than 2^32. See patch 4 "dmapool: cleanup integer types". However the
kernel test robot has complained that some of the printk format
specifiers need to be changed to match the size_t type.
Tony Battersby
Cybernetics
Powered by blists - more mailing lists