Re: [RFC PATCH -v3 1/2] lmb: seperate region array from lmb_region struct

From: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -v3 1/2] lmb: seperate region array from lmb_region struct
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:13:46 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100323181345.GA1891@linux-sh.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BA8F7BD.20401@kernel.org>

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:17:49AM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On 03/23/2010 06:18 AM, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 11:42:41AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> also, i'd suggest to shorten region_array_size to region_size (we know it's an 
> >> array), so it would become:
> >>
> >> 	lmb.memory.region	 = lmb_memory_region;
> >> 	lmb.memory.region_size	 = ARRAY_SIZE(lmb_memory_region);
> >>
> > I don't mean to be pedantic, but the LMB code already has a lot of
> > region.size references so region_size looks a bit awkward. All of the
> > accessors in linux/lmb.h use region_nr as the array index, so perhaps
> > nr_regions would be less ambiguous.
> 
> @@ -26,7 +26,8 @@ struct lmb_property {
>  struct lmb_region {
>  	unsigned long cnt;
>  	u64 size;
> -	struct lmb_property region[MAX_LMB_REGIONS+1];
> +	struct lmb_property *region;
> +	unsigned long region_array_size;
>  };
> 
> cnt is number of slots used.
> size is memory size
> 
I'm fully aware of what each of these things are, and I have no idea what
any of that has to do with the point I raised above.

> can we use rgn_sz for region array size?
> 
No.