On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 11:24:54AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On 05/04/2012 12:23 AM, Seth Jennings wrote: > > > On 05/03/2012 08:32 AM, Nitin Gupta wrote: > > > >> On 5/3/12 2:40 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > >>> We should use zs_handle instead of void * to avoid any > >>> confusion. Without this, users may just treat zs_malloc return value as > >>> a pointer and try to deference it. > >>> > >>> Cc: Dan Magenheimer<dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk<konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim<minchan@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/staging/zcache/zcache-main.c | 8 ++++---- > >>> drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.c | 8 ++++---- > >>> drivers/staging/zram/zram_drv.h | 2 +- > >>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c | 28 > >>> ++++++++++++++-------------- > >>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc.h | 15 +++++++++++---- > >>> 5 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > >> > >> This was a long pending change. Thanks! > > > > > > The reason I hadn't done it before is that it introduces a checkpatch > > warning: > > > > WARNING: do not add new typedefs > > #303: FILE: drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc.h:19: > > +typedef void * zs_handle; > > > > > Yes. I did it but I think we are (a) of chapter 5: Typedefs in Documentation/CodingStyle. > > (a) totally opaque objects (where the typedef is actively used to _hide_ > what the object is). > > No? No. Don't add new typedefs to the kernel. Just use a structure if you need to. Vague "handles" are almost never what you want to do in Linux, sorry, I can't take this patch. greg k-h -- 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>