Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261422AbVA1DDL (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:03:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261415AbVA1DCk (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:02:40 -0500 Received: from umhlanga.stratnet.net ([12.162.17.40]:35036 "EHLO umhlanga.STRATNET.NET") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261419AbVA1DCf (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2005 22:02:35 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Correct way to release get_user_pages()? X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information From: Roland Dreier Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:02:28 -0800 Message-ID: <52pszqw917.fsf@topspin.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Corporate Culture, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jan 2005 03:02:31.0869 (UTC) FILETIME=[CF1C56D0:01C504E5] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 627 Lines: 17 Reading through the tree, I see that some callers of get_user_pages() release the pages that they got via put_page(), and some callers use page_cache_release(). Of course has #define page_cache_release(page) put_page(page) so this is really not much of a difference, but I'd like to know which is considered better style. Any opinions? Thanks, Roland - 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/