Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] return value from shrinkers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 16 May 2013 09:52:05 +0200 Oskar Andero <oskar.andero@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > If we want the capability to return more than a binary yes/no message
> > to callers then yes, we could/should enumerate the shrinker return
> > values.  But as that is a different concept from errnos, it should be
> > done with a different and shrinker-specific namespace.
> 
> Agreed, but even if there right now is only a binary return message, is a
> hardcoded -1 considered to be acceptable for an interface? IMHO, it is not
> very readable nor intuitive for the users of the interface. Why not, as you
> mention, add a define or enum in shrinker.h instead, e.g. SHRINKER_STOP or
> something.

That sounds OK to me.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]