2024년 6월 10일 (월) 오후 3:08, Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx>님이 작성: > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 12:39:28PM +0900, Leesoo Ahn wrote: > > 2024년 6월 10일 (월) 오전 6:03, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>님이 작성: > > > > > > On Sun, 9 Jun 2024 00:21:14 +0900 Leesoo Ahn <lsahn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Setting 'limit' variable to 0 might seem like it means "no limit". But > > > > in the memblock API, 0 actually means the 'MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE' > > > > enum, which limits the physical address range based on > > > > 'memblock.current_limit'. This can be confusing. > > > > > > Does it? From my reading, this meaning applies to the range end > > > address, in memblock_find_in_range_node()? If your interpretation is > > > correct, this should be documented in the relevant memblock kerneldoc. > > It is :-P > > > IMO, regardless of memblock documentation, it better uses > > MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE enum instead of 0 as a value for the variable. > > Using MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE is a slight improvement, but renaming the > variable is not, IMO. I will post v2 as it replaces 0 with MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE without modifying the variable. Thank you, Andrew and Mike for the reviews. > > > Best regards, > > Leesoo > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike. Best regards, Leesoo.
