linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>,
	Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@gmail.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: __weak vs ifdef
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:41:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080725054142.372f1c03.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080725122454.GE6701@parisc-linux.org>

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:24:54 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 02:34:55AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > We should make arch_pick_mmap_layout __weak and nuke that ifdef.
> 
> I strongly disagree.  I find it makes it harder to follow code flow
> when __weak functions are involved.  Ifdefs are ugly, no question, but
> they're easier to grep for, see when they'll be defined and know which of
> the arch_pick_mmap_layout() functions will be called.  __weak certainly
> has its uses (eg the sys_ni_syscall is great) but I find it's becoming
> overused.
> 
> My basic point here is that __weak makes the code easier to write but
> harder to read, and we're supposed to be optimising for easier to read.
> 

If you see

void __weak arch_foo(...)

and can't immediately work out what's going on then converting it to an
ifdef maze won't save you.

  reply	other threads:[~2008-07-25 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-25  8:39 PAGE_ALIGN() compile breakage Adrian Bunk
2008-07-25  8:55 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-25  9:14   ` Adrian Bunk
2008-07-25  9:25     ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-25 18:34       ` Andrea Righi
2008-07-25  9:27     ` Adrian Bunk
2008-07-25  9:34       ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-25 12:24         ` __weak vs ifdef Matthew Wilcox
2008-07-25 12:41           ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-07-26 19:38           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-18  2:07             ` Grant Likely
2010-02-18  2:22               ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-26 21:22         ` [-mm patch] mm/util.c must #include <linux/sched.h> Adrian Bunk

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=20080725054142.372f1c03.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bunk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=righi.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).