[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.4.19pre2aa1
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, William Lee Irwin III wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 06:03:00PM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > For the other points I think you shouldn't really complain (both at
> > runtime and in code style as well, please see how clean it is with the
> > wait_table_t thing), I made a definitive improvement to your code, the
> > only not obvious part is the hashfn but I really cannot see yours
> > beating mine because of the total random input, infact it could be the
> > other way around due the fact if something there's the probability the
> > pages are physically consecutive and I take care of that fine.
> I don't know whose definition of clean code this is:
> +static inline wait_queue_head_t * wait_table_hashfn(struct page * page, wait_table_t * wait_table)
> +{
> +#define i (((unsigned long) page)/(sizeof(struct page) & ~ (sizeof(struct page) - 1)))
> +#define s(x) ((x)+((x)>>wait_table->shift))
> + return wait_table->head + (s(i) & (wait_table->size-1));
> +#undef i
> +#undef s
> +}
> I'm not sure I want to find out.
> Bill

Methinks there is entirely too much white-space in the code. It
is almost readable *;). It probably could be fixed up to slip through
the compiler with no possibility of human interpretation, but that would
take a bit more work ;^)

The choice of temporaries makes me think of a former President
who, when confronted with a lie, said; "It depends upon what 'is' is!"
Keep up the good work!

Dick Johnson

Penguin : Linux version 2.4.18 on an i686 machine (799.53 BogoMips).

Bill Gates? Who?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.056 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site