Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] drivers/base/memory.c: Rename the misleading parameter

[Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>]

On 3/29/2019 3:06 PM, Baoquan He wrote:
> The input parameter 'phys_index' of memory_block_action() is actually
> the section number, but not the phys_index of memory_block. This is
> a relict from the past when one memory block could only contain one
> section.
>
> Rename it to start_section_nr.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>


Reviewed-by: Mukesh Ojha <mojha@codeaurora.org>

Cheers,
-Mukesh

> ---
>   drivers/base/memory.c | 7 ++++---
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/memory.c b/drivers/base/memory.c
> index cb8347500ce2..9ea972b2ae79 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/memory.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/memory.c
> @@ -231,13 +231,14 @@ static bool pages_correctly_probed(unsigned long start_pfn)
>    * OK to have direct references to sparsemem variables in here.
>    */
>   static int
> -memory_block_action(unsigned long phys_index, unsigned long action, int online_type)
> +memory_block_action(unsigned long start_section_nr, unsigned long action,
> +		    int online_type)
>   {
>   	unsigned long start_pfn;
>   	unsigned long nr_pages = PAGES_PER_SECTION * sections_per_block;
>   	int ret;
>   
> -	start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(phys_index);
> +	start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(start_section_nr);
>   
>   	switch (action) {
>   	case MEM_ONLINE:
> @@ -251,7 +252,7 @@ memory_block_action(unsigned long phys_index, unsigned long action, int online_t
>   		break;
>   	default:
>   		WARN(1, KERN_WARNING "%s(%ld, %ld) unknown action: "
> -		     "%ld\n", __func__, phys_index, action, action);
> +		     "%ld\n", __func__, start_section_nr, action, action);
>   		ret = -EINVAL;
>   	}
>