From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753874AbcKVG2d (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 01:28:33 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:59466 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752364AbcKVG2b (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 01:28:31 -0500 Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 22:28:29 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Alexander Duyck Cc: Alexander Duyck , linux-mm , Netdev , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [mm PATCH v3 21/23] mm: Add support for releasing multiple instances of a page Message-Id: <20161121222829.30e2bf67c58af5f1c91d1a1b@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20161110113027.76501.63030.stgit@ahduyck-blue-test.jf.intel.com> <20161110113606.76501.70752.stgit@ahduyck-blue-test.jf.intel.com> <20161118152716.3f7acf6e25f142846909b2f6@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.2 (GTK+ 2.24.28; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 08:21:39 -0800 Alexander Duyck wrote: > >> + __free_pages_ok(page, order); > >> + } > >> +} > >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__page_frag_drain); > > > > It's an exported-to-modules library function. It should be documented, > > please? The page-frag API is only partially documented, but that's no > > excuse. > > Okay. I assume you want the documentation as a follow-up patch since > I received a notice that the patch was added to -mm? Yes please. Or a replacement patch which I'll temporarily turn into a delta, either is fine. > If you would like I could look at doing a couple of renaming patches > so that we make the API a bit more consistent. I could move the > __alloc and __free to what you have suggested, and then take a look at > trying to rename the refill/drain to be a bit more consistent in terms > of what they are supposed to work on and how they are supposed to be > used. I think that would be better - it's hardly high-priority but a bit of attention to the documentation and naming conventions would help tidy things up. When you can't find anything else to do ;)