Hi Minchan, On 05/16/2010 09:50 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > One thing was about naming. > Now block device operations has field naming swap_xxx_notify > (I am not sure exact name). My concern was it's very specific about swap. > So I thought we would be better to more abstract name. > > I thought trim like naming as Linus said. This call is very swap specific and is quite different from generic trim stuff. So, I think it will be better not be generalize the name and avoid confusing it with trim/discard etc. > > Anyway, I will review again at next week if it isn't merged > linux-next(or linux-mm ?? which is right?). That's because I have a > interest in your good ramzswap. :) > Thanks, comments/reviews are always welcome :) Greg: In the meantime, considering 3 Acks, is it possible to pull it in linux-next? I can then send additional patches, if you raise any concerns that needs further code changes. Thanks, Nitin _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
