From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:01:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: GIT head no longer boots on x86-64 In-Reply-To: <48F60D56.6040209@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <1223910693-28693-1-git-send-email-jirislaby@gmail.com> <20081013164717.7a21084a@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20081015115153.GA16413@elte.hu> <48F60D56.6040209@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Jiri Slaby Cc: Ingo Molnar , Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, 15 Oct 2008, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > Users usually do > is_vmalloc_addr(a) ? vfree(a) : kfree(a); > Even there it makes more sense to me. Umm. No it doesn't. That is exactly _wh7y_ "is_vmalloc_addr()" exists. But we sure as hell don't ever want to trigger on modules for that. If you think that "is_vmalloc_addr()" should trigger for any kernel virtual address, why not just make it do so, then? And _name_ it so. Names are important. In fact, naming is often _more_ important than the implementation is. And that means that the implementation should follow the naming, or the implementation is wrong. Linus -- 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