From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14620.2180.8684.529000@charged.uio.no> Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 15:35:00 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: PATCH: rewrite of invalidate_inode_pages In-Reply-To: References: <14619.16278.813629.967654@charged.uio.no> <391BEAED.C9313263@sympatico.ca> Reply-To: trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no From: Trond Myklebust Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: >>>>> " " == Arjan van de Ven writes: >> Could you please look into changing the name of >> invalidate_inode_pages() to invalidate_pages_noblock() or >> something like that? Since NFS is the only place where this >> function is used, a change of name should not break any other >> code. > I'd vote for "invalidate_unlocked_inode_pages", as it also > suggests that the locked pages aren't invalidated. That sounds very good to me. Just so long as the name becomes more self-documenting than it is now. Intelligent people are making mistakes about what we want to do with this function, so it definitely needs to be documented more clearly. Cheers, Trond -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/