On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 15:46 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > +static struct page *
> > +fallback_alloc(int alloctype, struct zone *zone, unsigned int order)
> > {
> ...
> > + /*
> > + * Here, the alloc type lists has been depleted as well as the global
> > + * pool, so fallback. When falling back, the largest possible block
> > + * will be taken to keep the fallbacks clustered if possible
> > + */
> > + while ((alloctype = *(++fallback_list)) != -1) {
>
> That's a bit obtuse. Is there no way to simplify it? Just keeping an
> index instead of a fallback_list pointer should make it quite a bit
> easier to grok.
>
Changed to
for (i = 0; (alloctype = fallback_list[i]) != -1; i++) {
where i is declared a the start of the function. It's essentially the same
as how we move through the zones fallback list so should seem familiar. Is
that better?
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Java Applications Developer
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
