From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: rename PTE_MASK to PTE_PFN_MASK
References: <200807221431.58991.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
	<488566EA.5040805@goop.org> <200807221540.47161.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
	<4885774E.3000909@goop.org> <873am2kr4n.fsf@saeurebad.de>
	<4885F43B.7060307@goop.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:18:16 +0200
In-Reply-To: <4885F43B.7060307@goop.org> (Jeremy Fitzhardinge's message of
	"Tue, 22 Jul 2008 07:52:43 -0700")
Message-ID: <8763qyj6br.fsf@saeurebad.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1006
Lines: 28

Hi,

Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> writes:

> Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> PTE_PFN_MASK is not symmetric to PAGE_MASK.
>
> No, it isn't.  Is there anything about the name that suggests that it
> should be?  PTE_PFN_MASK is for operating on pteval_t-typed values
> extracted from ptes; PAGE_MASK is for operating on addresses.

I meant the naming scheme, not the functionality.

The thing PAGE_MASK and PTE_MASK have in common is that they are masks
and their names indicate what is masked away when applied.

So PAGE_MASK suggests that it masks out page details.  And PTE_MASK
suggests that it masks out PTE details.

PTE_PFN_MASK masks suggests that it masks out the flags, according to
the existing naming convention.  But it does the opposite.

	Hannes
--
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/