public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] percpu: explain quick paths in pcpu_[de]populate_chunk()
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:47:12 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B14ADE0.3020007@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B14AC35.3020700@redhat.com>

Hello,

On 12/01/2009 02:40 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
>> So, I don't know.  The first iteration only loop looks a bit unusual
>> for sure but it isn't something conceptually convoluted.
> 
> Now this seems to be better. So with this change, we can do:
> 
> pcpu_first_pop_region(chunk, rs, re, start, end);
> if (rs < re && ...)
>    return;
> 
> Right?

Yeap, but is that any better?  Passing lvalue loop parameters to loop
constructs is customary.  For almost all other cases, it's not, so

 pcpu_first_pop_region(chunk, &rs, &re, start, end)

would be better but then we have two similar looking interfaces which
take different types of parameters.  Also, you probably can drop rs <
re test there but for me it just seems easier to simply check the
first iteration.  If you think it's something worth changing and it
looks better afterwards, please send a patch.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun

  reply	other threads:[~2009-12-01  5:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-30  9:12 [Patch] percpu: remove two suspicious break statements Amerigo Wang
2009-11-30 11:09 ` Tejun Heo
2009-11-30 19:01   ` Christoph Lameter
2009-12-01  0:01     ` [PATCH] percpu: explain quick paths in pcpu_[de]populate_chunk() Tejun Heo
2009-12-01  2:02       ` Cong Wang
2009-12-01  5:00         ` Tejun Heo
2009-12-01  5:09           ` Tejun Heo
2009-12-01  5:40             ` Cong Wang
2009-12-01  5:47               ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2009-12-01  6:35                 ` Cong Wang
2009-12-01  6:59                   ` Tejun Heo
2009-12-01  7:13                     ` [PATCH] percpu: refactor the code " Cong Wang
2009-12-01 14:31                       ` Tejun Heo

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=4B14ADE0.3020007@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=amwang@redhat.com \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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