Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:41:53 -0800 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [patch 12/21] Xen-paravirt: Allocate and free vmalloc areas |
| |
Keir Fraser wrote: > It has no other users right now and get_vm_area_sync() would be a > better-named and more generically useful function than alloc_vm_area(). I'm thinking "reserve" might be a better term; "get" generally has the suggestion of a refcount.
> get_vm_area_sync(), partnered with existing remove_vm_area(), just seems > much smaller and neater than adding four new functions with a more complex > usage: alloc_vm_area, {lock,unlock}_vm_area, and free_vm_area. Maybe keeping > free_vm_area() too makes sense as its interface is more neatly symmetrical > to that of get_vm_area().
I've already killed the lock/unlock functions. I'll come up with something for the get/allocate/reserve and free functions.
J - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |