On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 4:00 AM Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 01:07:14AM +0800, Pengfei Li wrote:
>
> Hi Pengfei!
>
> > The 'type' of the function new_kmalloc_cache should be
> > enum kmalloc_cache_type instead of int, so correct it.
>
> I think you mean type of the 'i' variable, not the type of
> new_kmalloc_cache() function. Also the name of the patch is
> misleading. How about
> mm, slab_common: use enum kmalloc_cache_type to iterate over kmalloc caches ?
> Or something like this.
>
Ok, this name is really better :)
> The rest of the series looks good to me.
>
> Please, feel free to use
> Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx>
> for patches [1-3] in the series after fixing this commit message and
> restoring __initconst.
>
Thanks!
> Patch [4] needs some additional clarifications, IMO.
>
I will add more clarification in v3.
> Thank you!
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pengfei Li <lpf.vector@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
>
>
>
> > ---
> > mm/slab_common.c | 5 +++--
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/slab_common.c b/mm/slab_common.c
> > index cae27210e4c3..d64a64660f86 100644
> > --- a/mm/slab_common.c
> > +++ b/mm/slab_common.c
> > @@ -1192,7 +1192,7 @@ void __init setup_kmalloc_cache_index_table(void)
> > }
> >
> > static void __init
> > -new_kmalloc_cache(int idx, int type, slab_flags_t flags)
> > +new_kmalloc_cache(int idx, enum kmalloc_cache_type type, slab_flags_t flags)
> > {
> > if (type == KMALLOC_RECLAIM)
> > flags |= SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT;
> > @@ -1210,7 +1210,8 @@ new_kmalloc_cache(int idx, int type, slab_flags_t flags)
> > */
> > void __init create_kmalloc_caches(slab_flags_t flags)
> > {
> > - int i, type;
> > + int i;
> > + enum kmalloc_cache_type type;
> >
> > for (type = KMALLOC_NORMAL; type <= KMALLOC_RECLAIM; type++) {
> > for (i = KMALLOC_SHIFT_LOW; i <= KMALLOC_SHIFT_HIGH; i++) {
> > --
> > 2.21.0
> >
> >
