On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 06:20:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > I think such a change would be better but should also rename the API.
> > If developers see a get_foo type call, they will expect to see a put_foo
> > call or assume it's a bug even though the implementation happens to be ok
> > with that. Any suggestion on what a good new name would be?
> >
> > How about read_mems_allowed_begin() and read_mems_allowed_retry()?
> >
> > read_mems_allowed_begin would be a rename of get_mems_allowed(). In an
> > error path, read_mems_allowed_retry() would documented to be *optionally*
> > called when deciding whether to retry the operation or not. In this scheme,
> > !put_mems_allowed would become read_mems_allowed_retry() which might be
> > a bit easier to read overall.
>
> One:
>
> git grep -l "\(get\|put\)_mems_allowed" | while read file; do sed -i -e
> 's/\<get_mems_allowed\>/read_mems_allowed_begin/g' -e
> 's/\<put_mems_allowed\>/read_mems_allowed_retry/g' $file; done
>
> and a few edits later..
>
> ---
> include/linux/cpuset.h | 18 +++++++++---------
> kernel/cpuset.c | 2 +-
> mm/filemap.c | 4 ++--
> mm/hugetlb.c | 4 ++--
> mm/mempolicy.c | 14 +++++++-------
> mm/page_alloc.c | 8 ++++----
> mm/slab.c | 4 ++--
> mm/slub.c | 16 +++-------------
> 8 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuset.h b/include/linux/cpuset.h
> index 7a7e5fd..d008b03 100644
> --- a/include/linux/cpuset.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpuset.h
> @@ -89,25 +89,25 @@ extern void rebuild_sched_domains(void);
> extern void cpuset_print_task_mems_allowed(struct task_struct *p);
>
> /*
> - * get_mems_allowed is required when making decisions involving mems_allowed
> + * read_mems_allowed_begin is required when making decisions involving mems_allowed
> * such as during page allocation. mems_allowed can be updated in parallel
> * and depending on the new value an operation can fail potentially causing
> - * process failure. A retry loop with get_mems_allowed and put_mems_allowed
> + * process failure. A retry loop with read_mems_allowed_begin and read_mems_allowed_retry
> * prevents these artificial failures.
> */
Going over 80 columns there. This happens in other places in the patch
but the alternative in those cases is less readable.
> -static inline unsigned int get_mems_allowed(void)
> +static inline unsigned int read_mems_allowed_begin(void)
> {
> return read_seqcount_begin(¤t->mems_allowed_seq);
> }
>
> /*
> - * If this returns false, the operation that took place after get_mems_allowed
> + * If this returns false, the operation that took place after read_mems_allowed_begin
> * may have failed. It is up to the caller to retry the operation if
> * appropriate.
> */
80 cols again and it should be "returns true". Something like this?
/*
* If this returns true, the operation that took place after
* read_mems_allowed_begin may have failed artifically due to a paralle
* update of mems_allowed. It is up to the caller to retry the operation
* if appropriate.
*/
Other than that, the changes looked good and I agree that it is better
overall.
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>