From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA06900086 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:57:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 13:56:37 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: make expand_downwards symmetrical to expand_upwards Message-Id: <20110418135637.5baac204.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20110418100131.GD8925@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <20110415135144.GE8828@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20110418100131.GD8925@tiehlicka.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Hugh Dickins , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:01:31 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > Currently we have expand_upwards exported while expand_downwards is > accessible only via expand_stack or expand_stack_downwards. > > check_stack_guard_page is a nice example of the asymmetry. It uses > expand_stack for VM_GROWSDOWN while expand_upwards is called for > VM_GROWSUP case. > > Let's clean this up by exporting both functions and make those name > consistent. Let's use expand_stack_{upwards,downwards} so that we are > explicit about stack manipulation in the name. expand_stack_downwards > has to be defined for both CONFIG_STACK_GROWS{UP,DOWN} because > get_arg_page calls the downwards version in the early process > initialization phase for growsup configuration. Has this patch been tested on any stack-grows-upwards architecture? -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org