* Jeff Garzik <[email protected]> wrote:
> Two comments:
>
> 1) we have a vague definition of "RX work processed." Due to error
> conditions and goto's in that function, rx_processed_cnt may or may
> not equal the number of packets actually processed.
>
> 2) man I dislike these inline C statement combinations (ranting at
> original code style, not you). I would much rather waste a few extra
> lines of source code and make the conditions obvious:
>
> while (... && (rx_processed_cnt < limit)) {
> rx_processed_cnt++;
>
> ...
> }
>
> or even
>
> while (1) {
> ...
> if (rx_processed_cnt == limit)
> break;
> rx_processed_cnt++;
> }
>
> The compiler certainly doesn't care, and IMO it prevents bugs.
agreed. Do you have an uptodate patch/git-URI for the forcedeth rewrite
you did? I can throw it into the testbed.
Ingo
-
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]
