On Wednesday 09 January 2008 10:51, David Howells wrote:
quoted text
> Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > > Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> > > > No. I mean call the bit PG_private2. That way non-pagecache and
> > > > filesystems that don't use fscache can use it.
> > >
> > > The bit is called PG_owner_priv_2, and then 'subclassed' to PG_fscache,
> > > much like PG_owner_priv_1 is 'subclassed' to PG_checked as was
> > > recommended.
> >
> > It is not owner_priv if you're putting checks and tests into core
> > kernel pagecache code for it. owner_priv means a filesystem has it
> > _all_ to itself.
>
> Okay, I'll change it if it makes you happy.

It is to make everybody happy. Especially in code that everyone works
on like mm/ and fs/, you can't just have everybody following their own
slightly different conventions.


quoted text
> Bear in mind, though, you're 
> dictating instructions that conflict with those other people have dictated.

Can you point me to the posts. Thanks.
--
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/