From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James.Smart@Emulex.com,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Announce] Emulex LightPulse Device Driver
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:04:24 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <404F58A8.8040304@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040310095908.33b2082f.zaitcev@redhat.com>
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote:
> Flag problem on sparc is fixed by Keith Wesolowsky for 2.6.3-rcX,
> and it never existed on sparc64, which keeps CWP in a separate register.
>
> Why it took years to resolve is that the expirience showed that
> there is no legitimate reason to pass flags as arguments. Every damn
> time it was done, the author was being stupid. Keith resolved it
> primarily because it was an unorthogonality in sparc implementation.
You would never know there were so many sparc people, until I post
something incorrect about it. <grin>
I stand corrected. As someone mentioned in private, it's actually a
shame that was fixed, since that's one less argument that can be used
against such wrappers ;-)
>>But this bug is only an example that serves to highlight the importance
>>of directly using Linux API functions throughout your code. It may
>>sound redundant, but "Linux code should look like Linux code." This
>>emphasis on style may sound trivial, but it's important for
>>review-ability, long term maintenance, and as we see here, bug prevention.
>
>
> Yes yes yes. This is the way elx_sli_lock is harmful, not because
> of its passing flags.
Agreed.
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-10 18:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-09 22:45 [Announce] Emulex LightPulse Device Driver Smart, James
2004-03-10 0:09 ` Stefan Smietanowski
2004-03-10 7:21 ` vda
2004-03-10 8:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-03-10 15:21 ` James Bottomley
[not found] ` <mailman.1078908361.15239.linux-kernel2news@redhat.com>
2004-03-10 17:59 ` Pete Zaitcev
2004-03-10 18:04 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-03-10 22:47 Smart, James
2004-03-11 1:10 ` James Bottomley
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=404F58A8.8040304@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=James.Smart@Emulex.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zaitcev@redhat.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