lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] writeback: Unduplicate writeback reason
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 08:14:00PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Names of the writeback reasons are used in both the main kernel as well
> as for parsing the tracepoint format file. Instead of duplicating the
> names in two locations making it likely that they may become out of
> sync, use some macro magic to make sure all the names stay in sync. Any
> update only needs to happen in one spot for it to take place in all
> locations.
>
> Note, this is an RFC patch, and it probably needs much better comments
> (well, it currently has no comments), and the C() macro probably should
> have a different name too.

I'm not sure this is a pattern we want to repeat all over the place -
print_symbolic() is quite widely used and adding macro redefinitions
all over the place doesn't fill me with joy.

AFAICT this code doesn't need a declared array to work so you can
just use a preprocessor construct like this (as used in XFS):

#define value_1 1
#define value_2 2
.....

or

enum {
value_1 = 1,
value_2 = 2,
.....
}

followed by:

#define VALUES \
{ value_1, "Value 1" }, \
{ value_2, "Value 2" }, \
.....

And it just uses print_symbolic(__entry->value, VALUES); to print
them out.

If this construct does everything requiredi, then I think it is a
much better pattern to use because it's easy to maintain, doesn't
require an array to be declared in a C file and doesn't require
macro tricks to do it's job....

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-14 04:31    [W:1.595 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site