Re: [PATCH 03/18] dma-debug: add hash functions fordma_debug_entries

[Cyrill Gorcunov]

[Frederic Weisbecker - Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 08:11:00PM +0100]
| On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 09:45:14PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
| > [Frederic Weisbecker - Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:50:52PM +0100]
| > ...
| > | > +/*
| > | > + * Add an entry to a hash bucket
| > | > + */
| > | > +static void hash_bucket_add(struct hash_bucket *bucket,
| > | > +			    struct dma_debug_entry *entry)
| > | > +{
| > | > +	list_add_tail(&entry->list, &bucket->list);
| > | > +}
| > | > +
| > | > +/*
| > | > + * Remove entry from a hash bucket list
| > | > + */
| > | > +static void hash_bucket_del(struct dma_debug_entry *entry)
| > | > +{
| > | > +	list_del(&entry->list);
| > | > +}
| > | 
| > | 
| > | Perhaps the two wrappers above are unnecessary, since they are actually
| > | used once and only wrap a single list operation. No?
| > | 
| > | Frederic.
| > 
| > Hi Frederic,
| > 
| > I think it would be better to make them 'inline' only but remain
| > the wrappers as is, since it show logic flow and hides internal data
| > details. But it's my personal opinion.
| 
| 
| Yeah, I guess it's only a matter of taste :-)
| Anyway, as you said, it should be inlined.

Nod :) The only problem could be (it depends) -- is that
if one day some locking would be needed instead of fixing
one function you would need to grep all list_add/del entries :)

| 
|  
	- Cyrill -
--
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/