Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:44:22 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -rt 1/8] introduce PICK_FUNCTION |
| |
Daniel Walker wrote: > PICK_FUNCTION() is similar to the other PICK_OP style macros, and was > created to replace them all. I used variable argument macros to handle > PICK_FUNC_2ARG/PICK_FUNC_1ARG. Otherwise the marcos are similar to the > original macros used for semaphores. The entire system is used to do a > compile time switch between two different locking APIs. For example, > real spinlocks (raw_spinlock_t) and mutexes (or sleeping spinlocks). > > This new macro replaces all the duplication from lock type to lock type. > The result of this patch, and the next two, is a fairly nice simplification, > and consolidation. Although the seqlock changes are larger than the originals > I think over all the patchset is worth while. > > Incorporated peterz's suggestion to not require TYPE_EQUAL() to only > use pointers.
How come this is cc'ed to lkml? Is it something that is relevant to the mainline kernel... or?
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. - 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/
| |