lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch 3/6] mempolicy: add MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES flag
From
Date
On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 13:02 -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Paul Jackson wrote:
>
> > > return do_mbind(start, len, mode, mode_flags, &nodes, flags);
> >
> > The intermingling of 'flags', 'mode' and 'mode_flags' to refer to the
> > low bits, the high bits or all the bits of the flags field is handled
> > fairly carefully in your patch, but can still be a bit difficult to
> > keep track of which is which when reading.
> >
> > I'll wager not many readers can immediately say what the 'mode',
> > 'mode_flags' and 'flags' refer to, in the above code snippet, for
> > example.
> >
> > Do you have any suggestions on how to further improve the clarity of
> > this code?
> >
>
> This is a natural implementation detail to accomodate your insistance that
> the mode and flags be passed as separate actuals throughout many of the
> mm/mempolicy.c functions.

[:-(]

>
> No reader is going to understand immediately what 'mode', 'mode_flags',
> and 'flags' are if you only provide a single line of the code like that.
>
> It becomes rather obvious what they represent when you read the entire
> sys_mbind() implementation, which is serving a syscall that provides its
> own formal for passing flags. The name 'mode_flags' is exactly what it
> is: flags for the mempolicy mode.

Not to be confused with the MPOL_MF_* flags which are MemPOLicy Mbind
Flags passed via the flags parameter. Nor the other MPOL_F_* flags
which are get_mempolicy() flags, also passed via the flags arg.

:-)

Later,
Lee
>
> David



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-26 22:35    [W:0.060 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site