From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261931AbUBKHuT (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 02:50:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263596AbUBKHuT (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 02:50:19 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:18338 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261931AbUBKHuQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 02:50:16 -0500 Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 01:28:05 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Alex Pankratov Cc: acme@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2.6] [1/2] hlist: replace explicit checks of hlist fields w/ func calls Message-Id: <20040214012805.52e4af60.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <4029D267.40307@swapped.cc> References: <4029CB7B.3090409@swapped.cc> <20040213231407.208204c4.ak@suse.de> <4029D267.40307@swapped.cc> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:57:43 -0800 Alex Pankratov wrote: > Ugh, yeah, I thought about this. However my understand was that > since hlist_null is statically allocated variable, its address > will be a known constant at a link time (whether it's a static > link or dynamic/run-time link - btw, excuse my lack of proper > terminology here). So comparing something to &null would be > equivalent to comparing to the constant and not require an > extra register. Hmm, you're right. Apparently I was still thinking about the bad code generated by the standard list_heads. I guess it would be ok then. Still your first patch was rather intrusive regarding interface changes, so it may be a good idea to wait for 2.7 with this. -Andi