[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <CZ9C42ETAIZ5.2QF94SIXDWCHR@seitikki>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 20:23:23 +0000
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: <anakrish@...rosoft.com>, <bp@...en8.de>, <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>,
<chrisyan@...rosoft.com>, <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <hpa@...or.com>,
<kristen@...ux.intel.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org>, <mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <mkoutny@...e.com>, <seanjc@...gle.com>,
<sohil.mehta@...el.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>, <tj@...nel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<yangjie@...rosoft.com>, <zhanb@...rosoft.com>, <zhiquan1.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/sgx: Remove 'reclaim' boolean parameters
On Mon Feb 19, 2024 at 3:39 PM UTC, Haitao Huang wrote:
> Remove all boolean parameters for 'reclaim' from the function
> sgx_alloc_epc_page() and its callers by making two versions of each
> function.
>
> Also opportunistically remove non-static declaration of
> __sgx_alloc_epc_page() and a typo
>
> Signed-off-by: Haitao Huang <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>
> Suggested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
I think this is for better.
My view point for kernel patches overally is that:
1. A feature should leave the subsystem in cleaner state as
far as the existing framework of doing things goes.
2. A bugfix can sometimes do the opposite if corner case
requires some weird dance to perform.
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists