On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 10:05:52AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Wu Fengguang <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > #define RA_FLAG_MISS 0x01 /* a cache miss occured against this file */
> > #define RA_FLAG_INCACHE 0x02 /* file is already in cache */
> > +#define RA_FLAG_MMAP (1UL<<31) /* mmaped page access */
> > +#define RA_FLAG_NO_LOOKAHEAD (1UL<<30) /* disable look-ahead */
> > +#define RA_FLAG_EOF (1UL<<29) /* readahead hits EOF */
>
> Odd. Why not use 4, 8, 16?
I'm now settled with:
-#define RA_FLAG_MISS 0x01 /* a cache miss occured against this file */
-#define RA_FLAG_INCACHE 0x02 /* file is already in cache */
+#define RA_FLAG_MISS (1UL<<31) /* a cache miss occured against this file */
+#define RA_FLAG_INCACHE (1UL<<30) /* file is already in cache */
+#define RA_FLAG_MMAP (1UL<<29) /* mmaped page access */
+#define RA_FLAG_NO_LOOKAHEAD (1UL<<28) /* disable look-ahead */
+#define RA_FLAG_EOF (1UL<<27) /* readahead hits EOF */
And still let the low bits hold ra_class values.
-
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]
