From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
To: dccp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:48:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071210114807.GC13179@ghostprotocols.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11971083883727-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Em Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 11:31:53AM +0000, Gerrit Renker escreveu:
> | >
> | > distcc[24516] ERROR: compile /root/.ccache/packet_his.tmp.aspire.home.net.24512.i on _tiptop failed
> | > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c: In function '__one_after_loss':
> | > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:266: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand
> <snip>
> |
> | Because you do it this way:
> |
> | tfrc_rx_hist_swap(&TFRC_RX_HIST_ENTRY(h, 0), &TFRC_RX_HIST_ENTRY(h, 3));
> |
> | I checked and at least in this patch series all uses are of this type,
> | so why not do it using just the indexes, which would be simpler:
> |
> | tfrc_rx_hist_swap(h, 0, 3);
> |
> | With this implementation:
> |
> | static void tfrc_rx_hist_swap(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h, const int a, const int b)
> | {
> | const int idx_a = tfrc_rx_hist_index(h, a),
> | int idx_b = tfrc_rx_hist_index(h, b);
> | struct tfrc_rx_hist_entry *tmp = h->ring[idx_a];
> |
> | h->ring[idx_a] = h->ring[idx_b];
> | h->ring[idx_b] = tmp;
> | }
> |
> Agreed, that is useful in the present case, since then everything uses
> inlines. The only suggestion I'd like to make is to use `u8' instead of
> `int' since the indices will have very low values.
Agreed.
> There is a related point: you will probably have noticed that loss_interval.c
> also uses macros. I don't know if you are planning to convert these also into
> inlines. I think that there would be less benefit in converting these, since
> they are locl to loss_interval.c and mostly serve to improve readability.
In general I'm against using macros for functions, so please always
consider doing things as inlines.
I'll read some more patches today and provide comments as to if I think
it is ok for now to keep it as macros.
> As I have at least one other patch to revise (plus another minor one),
> I'll rework this according to the above.
Thank you.
- Arnaldo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-10 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-08 10:06 [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the macros/inlines that were moved Gerrit Renker
2007-12-08 18:47 ` [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2007-12-10 11:31 ` [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the macros/inlines that were moved Gerrit Renker
2007-12-10 11:48 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [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=20071210114807.GC13179@ghostprotocols.net \
--to=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=dccp@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox