On Thu, 17 May 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > On 05/16/2012 07:38 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > On Wed, 16 May 2012, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 16 May 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It is of course ok to reuse the field, but what about we make it a > > > > union > > > > > > between "list" and "lru" ? > > > > > > > > That is what this patch does. You are commenting on code that was > > > > removed. > > Argh. No it doesnt..... It will be easy to add though. But then you have > > two list_head definitions in page struct that just differ in name. > As I said previously, it sounds stupid if you look from the typing system > point of view. > > But when I read something like: list_add(&sp->lru, list), something very > special assumptions about list ordering comes to mind. It's something that > should be done for the sake of the readers. Allright will merge the changes that I posted into the patch. -- 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>