From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx106.postini.com [74.125.245.106]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A29556B005D for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 20:08:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e33.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:08:27 -0700 Received: from d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.107]) by d03dlp02.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30993E4003E for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:08:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r0G18Mjg088816 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:08:22 -0700 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r0G18L7j001538 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:08:21 -0700 Message-ID: <50F5FD7E.4080901@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 17:08:14 -0800 From: Dave Hansen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/17] mm/compaction: rename var zone_end_pfn to avoid conflicts with new function References: <1358295894-24167-1-git-send-email-cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1358295894-24167-2-git-send-email-cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1358295894-24167-2-git-send-email-cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Cody P Schafer Cc: Linux MM , LKML , Andrew Morton , Catalin Marinas On 01/15/2013 04:24 PM, Cody P Schafer wrote: > Patches that follow add a inline function zone_end_pfn(), which > conflicts with the naming of a local variable in isolate_freepages(). > > Rename the variable so it does not conflict. It's probably worth a note here that you _will_ be migrating this use over to the new function anyway. > @@ -706,7 +706,7 @@ static void isolate_freepages(struct zone *zone, > * only scans within a pageblock > */ > end_pfn = ALIGN(pfn + 1, pageblock_nr_pages); > - end_pfn = min(end_pfn, zone_end_pfn); > + end_pfn = min(end_pfn, z_end_pfn); Is there any reason not to just completely get rid of z_end_pfn (in the later patches after you introduce zone_end_pfn() of course): > + end_pfn = min(end_pfn, zone_end_pfn(zone)); I wouldn't be completely opposed to you just introducing zone_end_pfn() and doing all the replacements in a single patch. It would make it somewhat easier to review, and it would also save the juggling you have to do with this one. -- 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