On Wed, 7 November 2007 10:40:55 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
quoted text
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 November 2007 17:11:44 -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > >  
> > > +void *get_inodes(struct kmem_cache *s, int nr, void **v)
> > > +{
> > > +	int i;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock(&inode_lock);
> > > +	for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
> > > +		struct inode *inode = v[i];
> > > +
> > > +		if (inode->i_state & (I_FREEING|I_CLEAR|I_WILL_FREE))
> > > +			v[i] = NULL;
> > > +		else
> > > +			__iget(inode);
> > > +	}
> > > +	spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
> > > +	return NULL;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(get_inodes);
> > 
> > What purpose does the return type have?
> 
> The pointer is for communication between the get and kick methods. get() 
> can  modify kick() behavior by returning a pointer to a data structure or 
> using the pointer to set a flag. F.e. get() may discover that there is an 
> unreclaimable object and set a flag that causes kick to simply undo the 
> refcount increment. get() may build a map for the objects and indicate in 
> the map special treatment. 

Is there a get/kick pair that actually does this?  So far I haven't
found anything like it.

Also, something vaguely matching that paragraph might make sense in a
kerneldoc header to the function. ;)

Jörn

-- 
There is no worse hell than that provided by the regrets
for wasted opportunities.
-- Andre-Louis Moreau in Scarabouche
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/