Re: [patch] 2.6.1-mm5 compile do not use shared extable code for

David Mosberger
2004-01-27T17:54:02Z

>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 19:56:26 +1100, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> said:

Paul> David Mosberger writes:
>> How about the attached one? It will touch memory more when
>> moving an element down, but we're talking about exception tables
>> here, and I don't think module loading time would be affected in
>> any noticable fashion.

Paul> Hmmm... Stylistically I much prefer to pick up the new
Paul> element, move the others up and just drop the new element in
Paul> where it should go, rather than doing swap, swap, swap down
Paul> the list.

The original code may be slightly faster, but who cares? From a
readability point of view, I think my version is easier to understand.

Paul> Also, I don't think there is enough code there to be worth the
Paul> bother of trying to abstract the generic routine so you can
Paul> plug in different compare and move-element routines. The
Paul> whole sort routine is only 16 lines of code, after all. Why
Paul> not just have an ia64-specific version of sort_extable?
Paul> That's what I thought you would do.

That's certainly an option. It was Andrew who called for a generic
version. I tend to agree with him because even though it's just a
little sort routine, it's one of those things where stupid errors tend
to creep in. And like I mentioned earlier, Alpha needs the exact same
code (and frankly, I'm surprised there are 64-bit platforms that do
NOT use the location-relative format that Richard invented).

--david