From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262647AbULPJPd (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:15:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262649AbULPJPc (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:15:32 -0500 Received: from almesberger.net ([63.105.73.238]:51721 "EHLO host.almesberger.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262647AbULPJP2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 04:15:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 06:15:17 -0300 From: Werner Almesberger To: Con Kolivas Cc: Rajesh Venkatasubramanian , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Generalized prio_tree, revisited Message-ID: <20041216061517.O1229@almesberger.net> References: <20041216053118.M1229@almesberger.net> <41C14F1B.8000401@kolivas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41C14F1B.8000401@kolivas.org>; from kernel@kolivas.org on Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 08:02:19PM +1100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Con Kolivas wrote: > While not being able to comment on the actual patch I think having a 1 > or 0 for different types is not clear. Yeah, it's not pretty. I also hope this division to be very transitional, that's why I didn't bother to do anything nicer. > Naming them different struct names would seem to me much more readable. Struct names ? I'd rather not duplicate everything. Or did you mean initialization function names, e.g. INIT_RAW_PRIO_TREE_ROOT ? Or, for just the flag, maybe something like #define PRIO_TREE_RAW 1 #define PRIO_TREE_NORMAL 0 ? - Werner -- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, Buenos Aires, Argentina werner@almesberger.net / /_http://www.almesberger.net/____________________________________________/