From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Ganesh Mahendran <opensource.ganesh@gmail.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/zsmalloc: adjust order of functions
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:43:58 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141216054357.GA17615@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADAEsF99yOT0ZHD3yDxT_tOM-48=3gut+-GB6SR5BBZxZ_XY6w@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 12:08:02PM +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> Hello Minchan,
>
>
> 2014-12-16 8:40 GMT+08:00 Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>:
> > Hello Ganesh,
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 09:43:23PM +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> >> Currently functions in zsmalloc.c does not arranged in a readable
> >> and reasonable sequence. With the more and more functions added,
> >> we may meet below inconvenience. For example:
> >>
> >> Current functions:
> >> void zs_init()
> >> {
> >> }
> >>
> >> static void get_maxobj_per_zspage()
> >> {
> >> }
> >>
> >> Then I want to add a func_1() which is called from zs_init(), and this new added
> >> function func_1() will used get_maxobj_per_zspage() which is defined below zs_init().
> >>
> >> void func_1()
> >> {
> >> get_maxobj_per_zspage()
> >> }
> >>
> >> void zs_init()
> >> {
> >> func_1()
> >> }
> >>
> >> static void get_maxobj_per_zspage()
> >> {
> >> }
> >>
> >> This will cause compiling issue. So we must add a declaration:
> >> static void get_maxobj_per_zspage();
> >> before func_1() if we do not put get_maxobj_per_zspage() before func_1().
> >
> > Yes, I suffered from that when I made compaction but was not sure
> > it's it was obviously wrong.
> > Stupid question:
> > What's the problem if we should put function declaration on top of
> > source code?
>
> There is no problem if we do this. But if we obey to some coding
> style, then it will
> be convenient for the later developers.
> Normally I put the global or important interface function at the
> bottom of the file, and
> the static or helper functions on the top. Because usually global
> functions is the caller, and
> static functions is the callee.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In addition, puting module_[init|exit] functions at the bottom of the file
> >> conforms to our habit.
> >
> > Normally, we do but without any strong reason, I don't want to rub git-blame
> > by clean up patches.
>
> Sorry, I did not consider this when I made this patch.:)
>
> >
> > In summary, I like this patch but don't like to churn git-blame by clean-up
> > patchset without strong reason so I need something I am sure.
>
> Now, zsmalloc module is active in development. More and more changes
> will be included.
> If we do not clean up, then this file may looks messy.
>
> Thanks a lot.
Okay, you move my heart
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Ganesh Mahendran <opensource.ganesh@gmail.com>
Cc: Nitin Gupta <ngupta@vflare.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/zsmalloc: adjust order of functions
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 14:43:58 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141216054357.GA17615@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADAEsF99yOT0ZHD3yDxT_tOM-48=3gut+-GB6SR5BBZxZ_XY6w@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 12:08:02PM +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> Hello Minchan,
>
>
> 2014-12-16 8:40 GMT+08:00 Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>:
> > Hello Ganesh,
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 09:43:23PM +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:
> >> Currently functions in zsmalloc.c does not arranged in a readable
> >> and reasonable sequence. With the more and more functions added,
> >> we may meet below inconvenience. For example:
> >>
> >> Current functions:
> >> void zs_init()
> >> {
> >> }
> >>
> >> static void get_maxobj_per_zspage()
> >> {
> >> }
> >>
> >> Then I want to add a func_1() which is called from zs_init(), and this new added
> >> function func_1() will used get_maxobj_per_zspage() which is defined below zs_init().
> >>
> >> void func_1()
> >> {
> >> get_maxobj_per_zspage()
> >> }
> >>
> >> void zs_init()
> >> {
> >> func_1()
> >> }
> >>
> >> static void get_maxobj_per_zspage()
> >> {
> >> }
> >>
> >> This will cause compiling issue. So we must add a declaration:
> >> static void get_maxobj_per_zspage();
> >> before func_1() if we do not put get_maxobj_per_zspage() before func_1().
> >
> > Yes, I suffered from that when I made compaction but was not sure
> > it's it was obviously wrong.
> > Stupid question:
> > What's the problem if we should put function declaration on top of
> > source code?
>
> There is no problem if we do this. But if we obey to some coding
> style, then it will
> be convenient for the later developers.
> Normally I put the global or important interface function at the
> bottom of the file, and
> the static or helper functions on the top. Because usually global
> functions is the caller, and
> static functions is the callee.
>
> >
> >>
> >> In addition, puting module_[init|exit] functions at the bottom of the file
> >> conforms to our habit.
> >
> > Normally, we do but without any strong reason, I don't want to rub git-blame
> > by clean up patches.
>
> Sorry, I did not consider this when I made this patch.:)
>
> >
> > In summary, I like this patch but don't like to churn git-blame by clean-up
> > patchset without strong reason so I need something I am sure.
>
> Now, zsmalloc module is active in development. More and more changes
> will be included.
> If we do not clean up, then this file may looks messy.
>
> Thanks a lot.
Okay, you move my heart
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-16 5:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-13 13:43 [PATCH 1/2] mm/zsmalloc: adjust order of functions Ganesh Mahendran
2014-12-13 13:43 ` Ganesh Mahendran
2014-12-16 0:40 ` Minchan Kim
2014-12-16 0:40 ` Minchan Kim
2014-12-16 4:08 ` Ganesh Mahendran
2014-12-16 4:08 ` Ganesh Mahendran
2014-12-16 5:43 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2014-12-16 5:43 ` Minchan Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141216054357.GA17615@blaptop \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ngupta@vflare.org \
--cc=opensource.ganesh@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.