Re: [PATCH] PAG support only

[Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>]

David Howells <dhowells@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> wrote:
>
> 
> So you'd rather have:

Doesn't matter.

We want all the code looking the same, and that is more important than the
arguable benefit of the minor changes which you propose.

> 	long sys_setpag(pag_t pag)
> 	{
> 		if (pag > 0)		return vfs_join_pag(pag);
> 		else if (pag == 0)	return vfs_leave_pag();
> 		else if (pag == -1)	return vfs_new_pag();
> 		else			return -EINVAL;
> 	}

If someone else comes along and makes changes to this, you'll end up with a
mix of styles.

> > and syscalls should return long, not int.
> 
> Fair enough, but in arch/i386/kernel/process.c:
> 
> 	asmlinkage int sys_fork(struct pt_regs regs)
> 	asmlinkage int sys_clone(struct pt_regs regs)
> 	asmlinkage int sys_vfork(struct pt_regs regs)
> 	asmlinkage int sys_execve(struct pt_regs regs)
> 	etc...
> 
> Should these be fixed too (the i386 arch is referred to quite a lot)?

I don't know really.  David M-T said "syscalls should return long".  I'm
not sure why - perhaps it's only those which need 32-bit wrappers (guess).