On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 17:10:13 -0800
Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hugh Dickins <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > >
> > > But I'm still confused by all the math on addr/end at each
> > > level.
> >
> > You think the rest of us are not ;-?
>
> umm, given the difficulty which you guys are having with this, I get a bit
> worried about clarity, simplicity and maintainability of the end result.
We're working on it, trust me :-)
I have a simplification in mind that should take care of the issue
that led us to these problems. We should simply pass in "ceiling"
as "-1" instead of "0". Every single test against ceiling is
really done against "ceiling - 1".
Therefore, passing ceiling in as "top - 1" and then adjusting the
tests will clean this up substantially and make is much simpler.
I'm even sure that other similar refactoring is possible.
Hugh took the quantum leap we needed by implementing this at all,
some spaghetti code tests do not detract from his work conceptually.
That kind of stuff can be cleaned up.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
