Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri 30-10-20 15:27:51, Huang, Ying wrote: >> Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Wed 28-10-20 10:34:10, Huang Ying wrote: >> >> To follow code-of-conduct better. >> > >> > This is changing a user visible interface and any userspace which refers >> > to the existing name will fail to compile unless I am missing something. >> >> Although these flags are put in uapi, I found these flags are actually >> internal flags used in "flags" field of struct mempolicy, they are never >> used as flags for any user space API. I guess they are placed in uapi >> header file to guarantee they aren't conflict with MPOL_MODE_FLAGS. > > You are right. I have missed that. The comment in the header even explains > that. Anyway the placement is rather unusual and I think that those > flags do not belong there. > >> > Have you checked how many applications would be affected? >> >> Based on above analysis, I think there is no application that will be >> affected. >> >> > Btw I find "follow CoC better" a very weak argument without further >> > explanation. >> >> That is the only reason for the patch. If nobody thinks the change is >> necessary, I can just drop the patch. > > Well, to be honest I do not see any problem with the naming. This is a capitalized words and prefixed, so most people think it's OK. And in PATCH 2/2, there's a newly added label, mopron: Which may become moron: some people think that we'd better to change it. And to make the wording consistent, the constant is changed too. Best Regards, Huang, Ying
