From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:53:20 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg Subject: Re: [patch 2/6] mm: introduce pte_special pte bit Message-ID: <20080118185320.GB20020@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <20080118045649.334391000@suse.de> <20080118045755.516986000@suse.de> <20080118180431.GA19591@uranus.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: npiggin@suse.de, Andrew Morton , Hugh Dickins , Jared Hulbert , Carsten Otte , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 10:28:39AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > > One fundamental difference is that with the above syntax we always > > compile both versions of the code - so we do not end up with one > > version that builds and another version that dont. > > Yes, in that sense it tends to be better to use C language constructs over > preprocessor constructs, since error diagnostics and syntax checking is > improved. > > So yeah, I'll give you that it can be an improvement. It's just not what I > was really hoping for. Just to clarify - my comment was solely related to the usage of if (HAVE_*) versus #ifdef. I had nothing to do with the actual discussion which I do not try to follw . Sam -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org