From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx167.postini.com [74.125.245.167]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 89ACD6B0031 for ; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 23:41:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 13:41:16 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 22/35] shrinker: convert remaining shrinkers to count/scan API Message-ID: <20130606034116.GT29338@dastard> References: <1370287804-3481-1-git-send-email-glommer@openvz.org> <1370287804-3481-23-git-send-email-glommer@openvz.org> <20130605160821.59adf9ad4efe48144fd9e237@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130605160821.59adf9ad4efe48144fd9e237@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Glauber Costa , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , hughd@google.com, Greg Thelen , Dave Chinner , Marcelo Tosatti , Gleb Natapov , Chuck Lever , "J. Bruce Fields" , Trond Myklebust On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 04:08:21PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 3 Jun 2013 23:29:51 +0400 Glauber Costa wrote: > > > From: Dave Chinner > > > > Convert the remaining couple of random shrinkers in the tree to the > > new API. > > Gee we have a lot of shrinkers. And a large number of them are busted in some way, too :/ > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > > @@ -4213,13 +4213,14 @@ restart: > > spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); > > } > > > > -static int mmu_shrink(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc) > > +static long > > +mmu_shrink_scan( > > + struct shrinker *shrink, > > + struct shrink_control *sc) > > > > ... > > > > --- a/net/sunrpc/auth.c > > +++ b/net/sunrpc/auth.c > > -static int > > -rpcauth_cache_shrinker(struct shrinker *shrink, struct shrink_control *sc) > > +static long > > +rpcauth_cache_shrink_scan( > > + struct shrinker *shrink, > > + struct shrink_control *sc) > > + > > It is pretty poor form to switch other people's code into this very > non-standard XFSish coding style. The maintainers are just going to > have to go wtf and switch it back one day. My bad. That's left over from when I was originally developing the the patch set passed a couple more parameters to the shrinkers pushing every single declaration to well over the line length limits. I never converted them back as I removed the extra parameters, because it's far easier to just have delete a line that delete a variable and reformat the entire function declaration.... > Really, it would be best if you were to go through the entire patchset > and undo all this. Sure, that can be done. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com -- 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: email@kvack.org