From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFBFF6B01AD for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:11:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] Mempolicy: Don't call mpol_set_nodemask() when no_context From: Lee Schermerhorn In-Reply-To: References: <20100319185933.21430.72039.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20100319185940.21430.38739.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:11:49 -0400 Message-Id: <1269274309.23955.14.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Christoph Lameter Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Hugh Dickins , Ravikiran Thirumalai , KOSAKI Motohiro , David Rientjes , eric.whitney@hp.com List-ID: 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: email@kvack.org