Re: [RFC 1/4] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable

[Tejun Heo]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:24:32PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 08/01/2012 08:21 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:19:52PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >> If we switch to using functions, we could no longer hide it anywhere
> >> (we'd need to either turn the buckets into a struct, or have the
> >> user pass it around to all functions).
> > 
> > Create an outer struct hash_table which remembers the size?
> 
> Possible. I just wanted to avoid creating new structs where they're not really required.
> 
> Do you think it's worth it for eliminating those two macros?

What if someone wants to allocate hashtable dynamically which isn't
too unlikely?  I think it's best to stay away from macro tricks as
much as possible although I gotta admit I fall into the macro trap
more often than I would like.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/