> On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 23:31 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
quoted text
> > Hi!
> > 
> > > This patch adds writing support for /dev/oldmem. This is used to
> > > restore the memory contents of hibernated system.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
> > 
> > > +ssize_t write_oldmem_page(unsigned long pfn, const char *buf,
> > > +			  size_t csize, unsigned long offset, int userbuf)
> > 
> > Hmm, int userbuf is only ever set to one... Does it make sense to have
> > write_oldmem_page in the separate file? The onl user is mem.c, perhaps
> > it should go there?
> > 
> 
> write_oldmem_page is kept to be consistent with copy_oldmem_page as much
> as possible. The userbuf is used by copy_oldmem_page too, and
> write_oldmem_page is in the same file as copy_oldmem_page. I think the
> consistence between them is reasonable.
> 
> And the copy_oldmem_page/write_oldmem_page is considered to be
> architecture dependent. Now, there are different implementations for
> copy_oldmem_page on different architectures. So I think the
> copy_oldmem_page/write_oldmem_page should be kept in separate file
> instead of go mem.c.

I thought it may have something to do with consistency. ACK on that
one. Perhaps it should be pushed to akpm?
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/