![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew Morton (on Mon, 3 Apr 2006 01:33:42 -0700) wrote: >Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com> wrote: >> >> Before commit 47e65328a7b1cdfc4e3102e50d60faf94ebba7d3, next_thread() >> took a const task_t. Reinstate the const qualifier, getting the next >> thread never changes the current thread. >> > >Can do, but why? Does code generation improve? I have not checked. The const qualifier on this type of function falls into the "better safe than sorry" category. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-04-03 14:37 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||