[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZthWCrUR4VmroXZv@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 15:43:54 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] Resource: fix region_intersects() for CXL memory
On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 03:48:44PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 10:34:13AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
...
> >> Signed-off-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> >> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> >> Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
> >> Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
> >> Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> >> Cc: Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
> >> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
> >> Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
> >
> > You may move Cc list after '---', so it won't unnecessarily pollute the commit
> > message.
>
> Emm... It appears that it's a common practice to include "Cc" in the
> commit log.
For what benefit? (Note, nowadays we have lore.kernel.org which is under
the control of Linux kernel project)
Personally I see only downsides of these being inside the commit message.
Here is a discussion about this
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20240423132024.2368662-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/
...
> >> + ostart = max(res.start, p->start);
> >> + oend = min(res.end, p->end);
> >
> > Isn't a reinvention of resource_intersection()? With that in place you may also
> > drop the above resource_overlaps().
>
> sizeof(struct resource) == 8 * sizeof(unsigned long)
>
> Just want to avoid to define another struct resource on stack.
Is it a problem?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists