[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGsJ_4xdgD8grbW98Gfoc7X-fAVYzFtobczNCWApw-oPhj9dwg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 12:27:11 +0800
From: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....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 Sat, May 4, 2024 at 12:03 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> 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.
swap_free_nr() isn't separate, after this patch, it is the only one left.
there won't be swap_free() any more. it seems you want to directly
"rename" it to swap_free()?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists