Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > <IRONY ON>
> > So may I just suggest to repleace the usage of cpp at all with something
> > more
> > suitable for the task at hand and with a much more regular/stringent
> > syntax
> > better fitting into the syntax of the pure C language like m4 for
> > example?
> > </IRONY OFF>
> No. Still "better tools" variant. Check blk_dev_init() and tell me how do
> you like the end of this function (drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c). BTW, check
Yes you are right here I don't like this particular piece of code in esp
1. The macro hackery may very well be replaced with "vanishing macros"
2. This is basically an fully unrolled loop of calls into a function
3. It's making the corresponding driver code non self contained.
> how many of these CONFIG_... are needed anywhere on C level. Hint: see
> module_init macro.
Yes I like the introduction of the ld hackere there very much: It's
solving the problems 1. 2. and 3. by doing the proper thing ;-) i.e.
an statically initialized list of addresses and call them out of a loop.
> > The main problem with the CONFIG_ blah's isn't either the syntax nor
> > they current usage - the problem is inherent to the simple fact
> > that the number of possible combinations is of a very high order due
> > to simple combinatorics.
> It's not a fact, it's a problem... It doesn't _have_ to be very high
> order on cc level. ld - sure, but that's much simpler to deal with.
But in some cases the driver api in linux are not quite supportiv for
Please have a look at the strattegy routine (please allow me to use the
proper UNIX terminology here ;-) declaration hackery inside of ide.h, oh
it gote moved and I can't quite find it again... ;-)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Sep 07 2000 - 21:00:26 EST