Re: [PATCH] 2.5.10 IDE 42

[Martin Dalecki <dalecki@evision-ventures.com>]

Uz.ytkownik Linus Torvalds napisa?:
> 
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
>>>+		if (stat & READY_STAT)
>>>+			printk("DriveReady ");
>>>+		if (stat & WRERR_STAT)
>>>+			printk("DeviceFault ");
>>>+		if (stat & SEEK_STAT)
>>>+			printk("SeekComplete ");
>>>+		if (stat & DRQ_STAT)
>>>+			printk("DataRequest ");
>>>+		if (stat & ECC_STAT)
>>>+			printk("CorrectedError ");
>>>+		if (stat & INDEX_STAT)
>>>+			printk("Index ");
>>>+		if (stat & ERR_STAT)
>>>+			printk("Error ");
>>
>>I believe this is actually making it *less* readable.
> 
> 
> Somewhat agreed. Also, the above is just not the right way to do
> printouts.
> 
> I'd suggest rewriting the whole big mess as something like
> 
> 	#define STAT_STR(x,s) \
> 		((stat & x ##_STAT) ? s " " : "")
> 
> 	...
> 
> 	printf("IDE: %s%s%s%s%s%s..\n"
> 		STAT_STR(READY, "DriveReady"),
> 		STAT_STR(WERR, "DeviceFault"),
> 		...
> 
> which is pretty certain to generate much smaller code (not to mention
> smaller sources).

Agreed. Making the code more compact was the only reason I was
touching those debugging sections in first place.

BTW> I'm still puzzled that gcc-3.1 eats C++ like randomly
placed variable declarations. Is there someting I did miss in C9X
papers maybe?