On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> Yes, I knew that and I thought about it while typing, but
> my dynamic RAM was too dynamic and not being refreshed often
> enough. Thanks for doing it for me.
I knew it, I already sent you the links before :)
> BTW, I didn't mean unpopular for the epoll patch, I meant
> unpopular in general, especially for development kernel patches:
> if every new feature required docs along with it, it might slow
> down Linux development by one day, but help out everyone in
> the long run (tm?).
I do agree Randy about comments, don't get me wrong. But you know what my
job condition is :) Looking at the kernel source though, you find
something like :
/* add the fd to the interest set */
do_add_fd_to_the_interest_set();
and then you have the code that really would need comments completely
naked. While, again, I do agree that comments are completely missing in
the patch, I'm not that kind of guy that would like a function like :
static struct epitem *ep_find_nl(struct eventpoll *ep, int fd)
{
struct epitem *dpi = NULL;
struct list_head *lsthead, *lnk;
lsthead = &ep->hash[fd & ep->hmask];
list_for_each(lnk, lsthead) {
dpi = list_entry(lnk, struct epitem, llink);
if (dpi->pfd.fd == fd) break;
dpi = NULL;
}
DNPRINTK(3, (KERN_INFO "[%p] eventpoll: ep_find(%d) -> %p\n", current, fd, dpi));
return dpi;
}
commented with "search an fd inside the hash". What a comment like that
adds to this code ?
- Davide
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 22:00:41 EST