Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Add memcpy_cachebypass, a copy routine that tries to keep cache pressure down | From | Bryan O'Sullivan <> | Date | Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:30:01 -0700 |
| |
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 13:57 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> Please don't use a weak attribute, and instead use the same > "__HAVE_ARCH_FOO" cpp test scheme used for the other string > operations to allow a platform to override the default > implementation in lib/string.x
I'm a bit confused.
The last time I tried submitting a patch that followed that style (for __iowrite_copy*), it got NAKed for propagating preprocessor abuse (Linus roundly flamed someone for a similar patch a few weeks before I submitted mine), and Andrew suggested that I use the same scheme that this patch uses.
So whose instructions do I follow? Yours of today, or Andrew's and Linus's of a few months ago?
<b
- 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/
| |