> Sorry but there will be number of those once we get the dirty writeback
> for cpusets fixed. Did you review that patchset (only internally mailed
> so far).
I haven't reviewed it - sorry. Too much stuff; too little time.
If only I had Alan's bots, which are apparently on loan now to Andrew.
> I do not think it makes much sense to do these macros for the single
> occurrence here and otherwise.
I disagree. If just one thing, like cpusets, does the ifdef's, it might
be easier to read. But if several things do them in nearby code, that
code gets ugly and fries my limited brain circuits.
Even just one of them looks ugly to me -- changing what could be a
single indented line "cpuset_...(..);" line into three lines, two of
them violating the indentation.
It might look clearer to someone who is focused on that particular
change, but it adds unnecessary noise for the other 90% of the readers
of that code who are not concerned with cpusets at that point in time.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
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]
