On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 14:33 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
but anyway it's silly to be hardwired to such an interface that worst
of all requires switch statements instead of proper pointer to
functions and a fixed set of parameters and retval
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:40:46PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
It seems to me that common code can be shared using functions? No need
FWIW I prefer separate methods.
kvm patch using mmu notifiers shares 99% of the code too between the
two different methods implemented indeed. Code sharing is
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
It seems to me that common code can be shared using functions? No need
to stuff everything into a single function. We have method vectors all
over the kernel, we could do a_ops as a single callback too, but we
dont.
FWIW I prefer separate methods.
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Christoph Lameter wrote:
Here f.e. We can add a special emm_age() function that iterates
differently and does the | for you.
Well maybe not really necessary. How about this fix? Its likely a problem
to stop callbacks if one callback returned an error.
Subject: EMM:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 12:03:50PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
+ /*
+ * Callback may return a positive value to indicate a
count
+ * or a negative error code. We keep the first error
code
+ * but
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
but anyway it's silly to be hardwired to such an interface that worst
of all requires switch statements instead of proper pointer to
functions and a fixed set of parameters and retval semantics for all
methods.
The EMM API with a single callback is
