From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1757455AbZGPEtq@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757455AbZGPEtq (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:49:46 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757419AbZGPEtp
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:49:45 -0400
Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:58902 "EHLO
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755064AbZGPEtp (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:49:45 -0400
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:49:23 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
       Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
       Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
       Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Rename pgmoved variable in shrink_active_list()
Message-Id: <20090715214923.d0f0cf51.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090716133622.9D34.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
References: <20090716131928.9D25.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
	<20090715213516.9b47ad16.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20090716133622.9D34.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:38:21 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:22:30 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > -#define __add_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)
> > > -#define __sub_zone_page_state(__z, __i, __d)	\
> > > -		__mod_zone_page_state(__z, __i,-(__d))
> > > -
> > 
> > yeah, whatever, I don't think they add a lot of value personally.
> > 
> > I guess they're a _bit_ clearer than doing __sub_zone_page_state() with
> > a negated argument.  Shrug.
> 
> OK, I've catched your point.

I don't think I have a point ;)

> I'll make all caller replacing patches.

Well, if you guys think it's worth it, sure.