[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZjWzoGg3MRs0yiBR@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 21:03:44 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>
Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, david@...hat.com,
hanchuanhua@...o.com, hannes@...xchg.org, hughd@...gle.com,
kasong@...cent.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, surenb@...gle.com,
v-songbaohua@...o.com, willy@...radead.org, xiang@...nel.org,
ying.huang@...el.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com, yuzhao@...gle.com,
ziy@...dia.com, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] mm: remove swap_free() and always use
swap_free_nr()
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:37:06PM -0700, Chris Li wrote:
> Either way works. It will produce the same machine code. I have a
> slight inclination to just drop swap_free(entry) API so that it
> discourages the caller to do a for loop over swap_free().
Then just ad the number of entries parameter to swap_free and do away
with the separate swap_free_nr.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists