[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a901bf8d-d531-43b5-a621-b2e932f67861@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:55:44 +0100
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, Michal Swiatkowski
<michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<jiri@...nulli.us>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
<kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <horms@...nel.org>,
<pierre@...ckhpc.com>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
<maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>, <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
<arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>, <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 0/3] fix xa_alloc_cyclic() return checks
On 3/14/25 15:23, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:52:58PM +0100, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
>> What about changing init flags instead, and add a new one for this
>> purpose?, say:
>> XA_FLAGS_ALLOC_RET0
>
> No. Dan's suggestion is better. Actually, I'd go further and
> make xa_alloc_cyclic() always do that. People who want the wrapping
> information get to call __xa_alloc_cyclic themselves.
Even better, LGTM!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists