From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754850Ab1HYRMX (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:12:23 -0400 Received: from acsinet15.oracle.com ([141.146.126.227]:16598 "EHLO acsinet15.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754676Ab1HYRMW convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2011 13:12:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <8a95a804-7ba3-416e-9ba5-8da7b9cabba5@default> Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 10:11:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Magenheimer To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jeremy@goop.org, hughd@google.com, ngupta@vflare.org, Konrad Wilk , JBeulich@novell.com, Kurt Hackel , npiggin@kernel.dk, akpm@linux-foundation.org, riel@redhat.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, matthew@wil.cx, Chris Mason , sjenning@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jackdachef@gmail.com, cyclonusj@gmail.com Subject: RE: Subject: [PATCH V7 1/4] mm: frontswap: swap data structure changes References: <20110823145755.GA23174@ca-server1.us.oracle.com 20110825143312.a6fe93d5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20110825143312.a6fe93d5.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.4.1.0 (410211) [OL 12.0.6557.5001] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Source-IP: rtcsinet21.oracle.com [66.248.204.29] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A020209.4E568245.01AA,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [mailto:kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com] > Subject: Re: Subject: [PATCH V7 1/4] mm: frontswap: swap data structure changes Hi Kamezawa-san -- Domo arigato for the review and feedback! > Hmm....could you modify mm/swapfile.c and remove 'static' in the same patch ? I separated out this header patch because I thought it would make the key swap data structure changes more visible. Are you saying that it is more confusing? Or does your compiler have a problem after only this patch is applied? (My compiler is fine with it.) Thanks, Dan