From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
Ravikiran Thirumalai <kiran@scalex86.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
eric.whitney@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Mempolicy: Don't call mpol_set_nodemask() when no_context
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:11:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1269274309.23955.14.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1003220939410.15360@router.home>
On Mon, 2010-03-22 at 09:40 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Just use i instead of mode? Local variables typically have short names.
> "mode" sounds like a parameter.
That was probably my thinking when I used 'i' for the loop variable back
when I replaced the 'if-elseif' skip chain with the for loop to reuse
the [then] "policy_types[]" array from mpol_to_str(). But, I then went
and assigned it to the more meaningful 'mode' to carry around the rest
of function. Looking at it this time around, seemed like I didn't need
2 vars, and outside of the loop, I thought 'mode' would be
better--reinforcing the nomenclature.
> But its just
> style so ignore my comments
> if you want.
>
Aw, would I do that? But, let's wait to see if anyone else weighs in.
I'm not wedded to either one, except for the rationale, such as it is,
mentioned above.
Thanks for the review.
Lee
--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-22 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-19 18:59 [PATCH 0/6] Mempolicy: additional cleanups Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-19 18:59 ` [PATCH 1/6] Mempolicy: Don't call mpol_set_nodemask() when no_context Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-22 14:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-22 16:11 ` Lee Schermerhorn [this message]
2010-03-19 18:59 ` [PATCH 2/6] Mempolicy: Lose unnecessary loop variable in mpol_parse_str() Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-19 18:59 ` [PATCH 3/6] Mempolicy: rename policy_types and cleanup initialization Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-22 14:43 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-22 16:22 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-19 18:59 ` [PATCH 4/6] Mempolicy: factor mpol_shared_policy_init() return paths Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-22 14:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2010-03-19 19:00 ` [BUGFIX][PATCH 5/6] Mempolicy: fix get_mempolicy() for relative and static nodes Lee Schermerhorn
2010-03-19 19:00 ` [PATCH 6/6] Mempolicy: document cpuset interaction with tmpfs mpol mount option Lee Schermerhorn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1269274309.23955.14.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net \
--to=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.whitney@hp.com \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--cc=kiran@scalex86.org \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-numa@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox