From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751610AbYC3EcP (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 00:32:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750965AbYC3Eb7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 00:31:59 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:34092 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750905AbYC3Eb7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 00:31:59 -0400 Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:31:55 -0500 From: Paul Jackson To: "Huang, Ying" Cc: hpa@zytor.com, andi@firstfloor.org, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86_64 boot -v2: Add linked list of struct setup_data Message-Id: <20080329233155.ee909a04.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <1206672584.13404.25.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> References: <1206672584.13404.25.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.12.0; 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 List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Huang wrote: > +/* setup data types */ > +#define SETUP_NONE 0 This define seems unused? Actually, what use would it ever have? Should not every struct setup_data on the setup_data linked list have a valid (not NONE) type? And perhaps that switch statement that confused me: > + switch (data->type) { > + default: > + break; > + } should not "break" silently on an unrecognized data->type, but rather complain bitterly? -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.940.382.4214