Re: [PATCH 2/2] page table iterators

[Hugh Dickins]

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> > The problem is just that these walker macros when they
> > do all the lazy walking stuff will be quite complicated.
> > And I don't really want another uaccess.h-like macro mess.
> > 
> > Yes currently they look simple, but that will change.
> 
> But even in that case, it will still be better to have the
> extra complexity once in the macro rather than throughout mm/
> 
> > Open coding is probably the smaller evil.
> > And they're really not changed that often.

My opinion FWIW: I'm all for regularizing the pagetable loops to
work the same way, changing their variables to use the same names,
improving their efficiency; but I do like to see what a loop is up to.

list_for_each and friends are very widely used, they're fine, and I'm
quite glad to have their prefetching hidden away from me; but usually
I groan, grin and bear it, each time someone devises a clever new
for_each macro concealing half the details of some specialist loop.

In a minority?
Hugh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/