From: Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>
To: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" <glommer@gmail.com>
Cc: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" <gcosta@redhat.com>,
ak@suse.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws,
avi@qumranet.com, chrisw@sous-sol.org, ehabkost@redhat.com,
hpa@zytor.com, jeremy@goop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@elte.hu, roland@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, zach@vmware.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:32:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200712182232.45685.elendil@planet.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5d6222a80712181300l707035e7mdb8a6e0d7a5ddca8@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl> wrote:
> > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly
> > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are
> > > moved to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files are
> > > deleted. Note that there's much less headers included in the final
> > > version.
> >
> > Either I must be missing something or this patch was corrupted somehow.
>
> neither.
> Note the else in the middle. It's just a mistake in the comment.
Wouldn't an explicit second #ifdef block be a lot clearer (and improve
maintainability) in this case?
An #else can easily be overlooked among other preprocessor commands or when
#ifdefs get nested.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-18 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-18 20:04 [PATCH] finish processor.h integration Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2007-12-18 20:54 ` Frans Pop
2007-12-18 21:00 ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2007-12-18 21:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-18 21:32 ` Frans Pop [this message]
2007-12-19 2:56 ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2007-12-19 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-19 12:15 ` Glauber de Oliveira Costa
2007-12-19 13:45 ` Ingo Molnar
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=200712182232.45685.elendil@planet.nl \
--to=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=avi@qumranet.com \
--cc=chrisw@sous-sol.org \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=glommer@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=zach@vmware.com \
/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