From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13465C2D0CE for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:00:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17EE24656 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:00:17 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D17EE24656 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 653276B0003; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:00:17 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 603356B0005; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:00:17 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 519A76B0006; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:00:17 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0095.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.95]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8AC6B0003 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:00:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin13.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id D568F3A92 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:00:16 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76403464032.13.rings31_76c8164599612 X-HE-Tag: rings31_76c8164599612 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2617 Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 01:00:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Jan 2020 17:00:14 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,347,1574150400"; d="scan'208";a="229081543" Received: from richard.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.159.54]) by orsmga006.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Jan 2020 17:00:13 -0800 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 09:00:24 +0800 From: Wei Yang To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Wei Yang , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, rientjes@google.com Subject: Re: [Patch v2 4/4] mm/page_alloc.c: extract commom part to check page Message-ID: <20200122010024.GF11409@richard> Reply-To: Wei Yang References: <20200120030415.15925-1-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <20200120030415.15925-5-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <3987ae0f-cbfc-1066-c78f-c5c6efc570ed@arm.com> <20200120123621.GE18028@richard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 10:19:38AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > >On 01/20/2020 06:06 PM, Wei Yang wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 12:13:38PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 01/20/2020 08:34 AM, Wei Yang wrote: >>>> During free and new page, we did some check on the status of page >>>> struct. There is some common part, just extract them. >>> >>> Makes sense. >>> >>>> >>>> Besides this, this patch also rename two functions to keep the name >>>> convention, since free_pages_check_bad/free_pages_check are counterparts >>>> of check_new_page_bad/check_new_page. >>> >>> This probably should be in a different patch. >>> >> >> In v1, they are in two separate patches. While David Suggest to merge it. >> >> I am not sure whether my understanding is correct. > >Keeping code refactoring and renaming separate is always better >but its okay, will leave it upto you. > Agree with you :-) Maybe I misunderstand David. Will split it in next version. -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me