Re: [PATCH] remove __pte_offset

[Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>]

"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> wrote:
>
> >> While we're on the subject, does anyone else find the p*_offset
> >> functions confusing?
> > 
> > How about sticking nice comments over them, rather than rampant renamings?
> 
> Would be nice if you could know what the thing did by just looking at
> the caller rather than the definition. 
> 
> Remaning everything is probably bad, but the renames of __pgd_offset 
> et al seem eminently sane to me, the fact that pgd_offset and __pgd_offset 
> return different types seems like horrible confusion for no real reason
> or benefit, especially when pgd_index already exists ...
> 

Oh I agree that pte_index is a fine name for it.  But not commenting the damn
things is a bug.  Sigh.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org">aart@kvack.org</a>