From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759285Ab0ENXLd (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2010 19:11:33 -0400 Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com ([148.87.113.121]:55276 "EHLO rcsinet10.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752903Ab0ENXLb (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2010 19:11:31 -0400 Message-ID: <4BEDD7D4.90002@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 16:08:04 -0700 From: Yinghai User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 SUSE/3.0.4-1.1.1 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt CC: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , David Miller , Linus Torvalds , Johannes Weiner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/37] lmb: Add lmb_find_area() References: <1273866363-14249-1-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> <1273866363-14249-8-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> <1273876749.21352.645.camel@pasglop> In-Reply-To: <1273876749.21352.645.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Auth-Type: Internal IP X-Source-IP: acsinet15.oracle.com [141.146.126.227] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090204.4BEDD88D.0130:SCFMA922111,ss=1,fgs=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/14/2010 03:39 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2010-05-14 at 12:45 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> it is a wrapper for lmb_find_base >> >> make it more easy for x86 to use lmb. ( rebase ) >> x86 early_res is using find/reserve pattern instead of alloc. >> >> keep it in weak version, so later We can use x86 own version if needed. >> also We need it in lib/lmb.c, so one called mm/page_alloc.c could get compiled > > I seem to have told you that I didn't want to have that thing in the > core :-) > > You keep adding those "wrappers" which basically just do prototype > adaptation and in this case a bit of cropping, with a name that is > utterly confusing as to what their intent is. > > I might have accepted that one if you had called it something like > lmb_find_in_range() which at least -means- something. thanks. will use sed to replace them. lmb_find_area ==> lmb_find_in_range() how about lmb_reserve_area ==> lmb_reserve_range lmb_free_area ==> lmb_free_range or leave them that way, later replace them lmb_reserve and lmb_free one by one? YH