From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] x86: allocate cpumask during check irq vectors
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 08:14:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140127071410.GA19617@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eb93bdba-d16d-4a85-ae40-f265b1db5ed4@email.android.com>
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> I strongly disagree with putting variables in file scope when
> function scope will do, [...]
Yes, you are right that single-use file scope statics 'could' be moved
function local and are syntactically superior because in that case
other functions cannot make use of it.
But I also have very good (and unfixable and thus stronger) reasons to
object to statics inside local variables: more than once I personally
missed 'hidden statics' during review, in one case it even slipped
into a commit, so it's not a practice I want to encourage in any shape
or form (even if the 'rule' is to have a big fat comment, people will
just see the function local static and emulate it without the
comment), for code I maintain.
It's not about you, it's about me and other reviewers: I've seen
statics slipping past other reviewers as well. So it's the lesser of
two evils. Can you accept that reasoning?
Thanks,
Ingo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-27 7:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-25 0:59 [PATCH -v2] x86: allocate cpumask during check irq vectors Yinghai Lu
2014-01-25 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-01-26 12:22 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-01-26 13:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-01-26 19:19 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-01-26 20:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-01-26 20:23 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-26 20:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-01-26 20:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-01-26 21:46 ` Prarit Bhargava
2014-01-27 7:14 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140127071410.GA19617@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.