[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d3582147-707d-4d8d-b062-3de7aa898928@lucifer.local>
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2023 06:16:13 +0000
From: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: vmalloc: convert vread() to vread_iter()
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 02:50:56AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:20:12AM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > /* for /proc/kcore */
> > -extern long vread(char *buf, char *addr, unsigned long count);
> > +extern long vread_iter(char *addr, size_t count, struct iov_iter *iter);
>
> I don't love the order of the arguments here. Usually we follow
> memcpy() and have (dst, src, len). This sometimes gets a bit more
> complex when either src or dst need two arguments, but that's not the
> case here.
Indeed it's not delightful, I did this purely to mimic the order of
copy_to_iter() and friends which place iter last, however on second thoughts I
think placing iter first would be better here where we have the freedom to order
things more sensibly.
I'll respin with a fix.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists