On Tue 18-10-16 14:56:09, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:54:25PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > > @@ -1282,7 +1282,7 @@ long get_user_pages(unsigned long start, unsigned long nr_pages, > > > int write, int force, struct page **pages, > > > struct vm_area_struct **vmas); > > > long get_user_pages_locked(unsigned long start, unsigned long nr_pages, > > > - int write, int force, struct page **pages, int *locked); > > > + unsigned int gup_flags, struct page **pages, int *locked); > > > > Hum, the prototype is inconsistent with e.g. __get_user_pages_unlocked() > > where gup_flags come after **pages argument. Actually it makes more sense > > to have it before **pages so that input arguments come first and output > > arguments second but I don't care that much. But it definitely should be > > consistent... > > It was difficult to decide quite how to arrange parameters as there was > inconsitency with regards to parameter ordering already - for example > __get_user_pages() places its flags argument before pages whereas, as you note, > __get_user_pages_unlocked() puts them afterwards. > > I ended up compromising by trying to match the existing ordering of the function > as much as I could by replacing write, force pairs with gup_flags in the same > location (with the exception of get_user_pages_unlocked() which I felt should > match __get_user_pages_unlocked() in signature) or if there was already a > gup_flags parameter as in the case of __get_user_pages_unlocked() I simply > removed the write, force pair and left the flags as the last parameter. > > I am happy to rearrange parameters as needed, however I am not sure if it'd be > worthwhile for me to do so (I am keen to try to avoid adding too much noise here > :) > > If we were to rearrange parameters for consistency I'd suggest adjusting > __get_user_pages_unlocked() to put gup_flags before pages and do the same with > get_user_pages_unlocked(), let me know what you think. Yeah, ok. If the inconsistency is already there, just leave it for now. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
