From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx157.postini.com [74.125.245.157]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45D926B0044 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 16:19:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by dakp5 with SMTP id p5so1040002dak.14 for ; Wed, 09 May 2012 13:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 13:19:18 -0700 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] zsmalloc use zs_handle instead of void * Message-ID: <20120509201918.GA7288@kroah.com> References: <1336027242-372-1-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <1336027242-372-3-git-send-email-minchan@kernel.org> <4FA28907.9020300@vflare.org> <4FA2A2F0.3030509@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4FA33DF6.8060107@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FA33DF6.8060107@kernel.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Minchan Kim Cc: Seth Jennings , Nitin Gupta , Dan Magenheimer , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 11:24:54AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On 05/04/2012 12:23 AM, Seth Jennings wrote: > > > On 05/03/2012 08:32 AM, Nitin Gupta wrote: > > > >> On 5/3/12 2:40 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > >>> We should use zs_handle instead of void * to avoid any > >>> confusion. Without this, users may just treat zs_malloc return value as > >>> a pointer and try to deference it. > >>> > >>> Cc: Dan Magenheimer > >>> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > >>> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim > >>> --- > >>> drivers/staging/zcache/zcache-main.c | 8 ++++---- > >>> drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 8 ++++---- > >>> drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.h | 2 +- > >>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c | 28 > >>> ++++++++++++++-------------- > >>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc.h | 15 +++++++++++---- > >>> 5 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > >> > >> This was a long pending change. Thanks! > > > > > > The reason I hadn't done it before is that it introduces a checkpatch > > warning: > > > > WARNING: do not add new typedefs > > #303: FILE: drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc.h:19: > > +typedef void * zs_handle; > > > > > Yes. I did it but I think we are (a) of chapter 5: Typedefs in Documentation/CodingStyle. > > (a) totally opaque objects (where the typedef is actively used to _hide_ > what the object is). > > No? No. Don't add new typedefs to the kernel. Just use a structure if you need to. Vague "handles" are almost never what you want to do in Linux, sorry, I can't take this patch. greg k-h -- 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