From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 22:37:06 +1000 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] Re: [PATCH] Cleanup and kernelify shrinker registration (rc5-mm2) Message-ID: <20070403123706.GX32597093@melbourne.sgi.com> References: <1175571885.12230.473.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070402205825.12190e52.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1175575503.12230.484.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070402215702.6e3782a9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1175579225.12230.504.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070402230954.27840721.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1175584705.12230.513.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1175584705.12230.513.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com Cc: Andrew Morton , lkml - Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm@kvack.org, reiserfs-dev@namesys.com List-ID: On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 05:18:25PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 23:09 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > This is not about efficiency. When have I *ever* posted optimization > patches? > > This is about clarity. We have a standard convention for > register/unregister. And they can't fail. Either of these would be > sufficient to justify a change. > > Too many people doing cool new things in the kernel, not enough > polishing of the crap that's already there 8( > > > But I think we need to weed that crappiness out of XFS first. Can anyone else see the contradiction in these statements? XFS's "crappiness" is a register/unregister interface. The only reason it's being removed is because it's getting replaced with a nearly identical register/unregister interface. Just thought I'd point that out.... ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group -- 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