Re: [-mm patch] mm/memcontrol.c: clenups

[Adrian Bunk]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 01:53:19PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 09:58:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Changes since 2.6.23-rc3-mm1:
> >> ...
> >> +memory-controller-add-switch-to-control-what-type-of-pages-to-limit-v7.patch
> >> ...
> >>  memory containment
> >> ...
> > 
> > This patch makes the following needlessly global functions static:
> > - lock_page_container()
> > - unlock_page_container()
> > - __mem_container_move_lists()
> > 
> > Additionally, there was no reason for the "mem_control_type" object.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> >  mm/memcontrol.c |    8 ++++----
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > b582cc510b6b0a182dc56025828e7a3c566b9724 
> > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index 8162d98..49bf04f 100644
> > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ enum {
> >  	MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_CACHED,
> >  	MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_ALL,
> >  	MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_MAX,
> > -} mem_control_type;
> > +};
> > 
> 
> Not sure about this, is this the preferred style?
>...


It's not about style - your "mem_control_type" was not an identifier,
it was an (unused) variable.


It seems the intended code was:

enum mem_control_type {
        MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_UNSPEC = 0,
        MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_MAPPED,
        MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_CACHED,
        MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_ALL,
        MEM_CONTAINER_TYPE_MAX,
};


cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/