From: David Newall <davidn@davidnewall.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@parisc-linux.org>
Subject: Re: Accessor macros vs reference counting
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:16:22 +1030 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47C0159E.5020806@davidnewall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080223090613.GJ16995@parisc-linux.org>
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 04:14:08PM +0800, WANG Cong wrote:
>
>> Use get_personality() macro instead of explicit reference
>> for parisc code.
>> - if (personality(current->personality) == PER_LINUX32
>> + if (personality(get_personality()) == PER_LINUX32
>>
>
> Hm. We have an interesting clash of conventions here.
>
> On the one hand, we have the java-style accessor convention.
> get_personality()/set_personality().
>
Is get_personality() thought to be better than current->personality? To
me, the latter seems more meaningful, and I'd rather see it than the former.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-23 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-02-23 8:14 [PATCH 00/16] (Resend) Use get_personality() WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 01/16] Make the macro get_personality function-like WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 02/16] mm: use get_personality() WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 03/16] fs: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 04/16] powerpc: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 05/16] parisc: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 06/16] sparc(64): " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 07/16] arm: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 08/16] x86: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 09/16] um: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 10/16] s390: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 11/16] mips: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 12/16] ia64: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 13/16] alpha: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 14/16] frv: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 15/16] mn10300: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 8:14 ` [PATCH 16/16] kernel: " WANG Cong
2008-02-23 12:03 ` [PATCH 15/16] mn10300: " David Howells
2008-02-23 12:02 ` [PATCH 14/16] frv: " David Howells
2008-02-23 10:08 ` [PATCH 08/16] x86: " Ingo Molnar
2008-02-23 10:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-23 10:39 ` WANG Cong
2008-02-23 9:06 ` Accessor macros vs reference counting Matthew Wilcox
2008-02-23 12:46 ` David Newall [this message]
2008-02-23 14:56 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-02-23 8:58 ` [PATCH 01/16] Make the macro get_personality function-like Bryan Wu
2008-02-23 12:02 ` David Howells
2008-02-23 8:51 ` [PATCH 00/16] (Resend) Use get_personality() Alexey Dobriyan
2008-02-23 8:59 ` WANG Cong
2008-02-23 9:27 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2008-02-23 9:56 ` WANG Cong
2008-02-23 18:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-02-23 19:16 ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-24 4:03 ` WANG Cong
2008-02-25 2:14 ` [PATCH] Remove the macro get_personality WANG Cong
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=47C0159E.5020806@davidnewall.com \
--to=davidn@davidnewall.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kyle@parisc-linux.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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