[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230111184037.GI11562@twin.jikos.cz>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2023 19:40:38 +0100
From: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>
Cc: zys.zljxml@...il.com, clm@...com, josef@...icpanda.com,
dsterba@...e.com, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yushan Zhou <katrinzhou@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] btrfs: use PAGE_{ALIGN, ALIGNED, ALIGN_DOWN} macro
On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 01:47:43PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> On 2023/1/3 13:11, zys.zljxml@...il.com wrote:
> > From: Yushan Zhou <katrinzhou@...cent.com>
> >
> > The header file linux/mm.h provides PAGE_ALIGN, PAGE_ALIGNED,
> > PAGE_ALIGN_DOWN macros. Use these macros to make code more
> > concise.
>
> Is there anything benefit from the change?
>
> In fact, PAGE_ALIGN()/PAGE_ALIGNED() is just using the same
> ALIGN()/IS_ALIGNED() macro.
>
> Thus I don't think your change is of any usefulness, not to mention it's
> going to introduce confusion and extra effort.
>
> I'm completely fine with regular ALIGN()/IS_ALIGNED() usage with PAGE_SIZE.
We already have PAGE_ALIGN in some places and I think it's a bit better
than the ALIGN/IS_ALIGN as it's clear that it's for a page.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists