Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765393AbYBMBc5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:32:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755839AbYBMBcf (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:32:35 -0500 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:50601 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754320AbYBMBce (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:32:34 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:32:29 -0600 From: Paul Jackson To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com, rientjes@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] mempolicy: convert MPOL constants to enum Message-Id: <20080212193229.edbff05a.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1202861432.4974.29.camel@localhost> <20080212183158.3ff4ccd5.pj@sgi.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.12.0; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 889 Lines: 22 Christoph wrote: > Good. And remove the enum. > > It would be better to add some sort of flags field? On the other hand, despite my brilliant (hah!) endorsement of bit field flags in my reply a few minutes ago, I'd settle for (1) removing the enum, and (2) using a flags field and more defines for the new stuff. I will grant that Christoph is correct that that form is more common in the kernel, and there is something to be said for doing things in the most common manner. -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.940.382.4214 -- 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/