From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.11]) by e33.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j95HNuUg032017 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 13:23:56 -0400 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.7) with ESMTP id j95HPVfK543012 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:25:31 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j95HPU7r008562 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:25:30 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] Fragmentation Avoidance V16: 005_fallback From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: References: <20051005144546.11796.1154.sendpatchset@skynet.csn.ul.ie> <20051005144612.11796.35309.sendpatchset@skynet.csn.ul.ie> <1128531235.26009.35.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 10:25:22 -0700 Message-Id: <1128533122.26009.46.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mel Gorman Cc: linux-mm , Andrew Morton , kravetz@us.ibm.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , jschopp@austin.ibm.com, lhms List-ID: On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 18:20 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > Changed to > > for (i = 0; (alloctype = fallback_list[i]) != -1; i++) { > > where i is declared a the start of the function. It's essentially the same > as how we move through the zones fallback list so should seem familiar. Is > that better? Yep, at least I understand what it's doing :) One thing you might consider is not doing the assignment in the for() body: for (i = 0; fallback_list[i] != -1; i++) { alloctype = fallback_list[i]; ... -- Dave -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org