Re: [PATCH] linux/string.h: Introduce streq macro.

[Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 21:51 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>
>> It's the same kind of API extension kstrdup(), for example, is.
>> Whether or not we should it do it is a separate matter and I think the
>> only reasonable argument for and against is whether it (a) reduces the
>> number of bugs,
>
> I did a quick search through the git logs, and found no bug fixes due to
> the semantics. At least by the time it got to mainline, they are fixed
> (which is a good thing).
>
>
>>  (b) improves code readability significantly,
>
> This is a matter of preference. I think I would prefer it, but obviously
> others do not.
>
>
>>  or (c)
>> generates better code.
>
> If we implement streq() separately from strcmp() it gets slightly
> better:

We'd probably end up with both in the tree, though, which is not an
improvement. With kstrdup(), for example, we were able to move code
out-of-line which improved the whole kernel.

To be honest, I don't think the arguments for streq() are that strong
but I wanted to point out that the arguments against it weren't all
that great either...

                        Pekka