Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 29 Mar 2019 20:55:03 +0800
From:   Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To:     Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, rafael@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        rppt@linux.ibm.com, willy@infradead.org, fanc.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] drivers/base/memory.c: Rename the misleading
 parameter
Message-ID: <20190329125503.GK7627@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
References: <20190329082915.19763-1-bhe@redhat.com>
 <20190329082915.19763-2-bhe@redhat.com>
 <20190329091325.GD28616@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20190329093725.blpcyane33fnxvn7@d104.suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190329093725.blpcyane33fnxvn7@d104.suse.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 03/29/19 at 10:37am, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 10:13:25AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 29-03-19 16:29:15, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > The input parameter 'phys_index' of memory_block_action() is actually
> > > the section number, but not the phys_index of memory_block. Fix it.
> > 
> > I have tried to explain that the naming is mostly a relict from the past
> > than really a misleading name http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190326093315.GL28406@dhcp22.suse.cz
> > Maybe it would be good to reflect that in the changelog
> 
> I think that phys_device variable in remove_memory_section() is also a relict
> from the past, and it is no longer used.
> Neither node_id variable is used.
> Actually, unregister_memory_section() sets those two to 0 no matter what.
> 
> Since we are cleaning up, I wonder if we can go a bit further and we can get
> rid of that as well.

Yes, certainly. I would like to post a new one to carry this.