lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
Hi,

On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Al Viro wrote:

> > You need some more magic macros to access/modify the data field.
>
> Which is done bloody rarely. grep and you'll see... BTW, there are
> other reasons why passing struct timer_list * is wrong:
> * direct calls of the timer callback

Why should that be wrong?

> * callback being the same for two timers embedded into
> different structs

That's done bloody rarely as well.

> * see a timer callback, decide it looks better as a tasklet.
> What, need a different glue now?

What's wrong with changing the prototype? If you don't do it, the compiler
will complain about it anyway.

> Look, it's a delayed call. The less glue we need, the better - the
> rules are much simpler that way, so that alone means that we'll get
> fewer fsckups.

You have the glue in a different place, so what?
The other alternative has real _practical_ value in almost every case,
which I very much prefer. What's wrong with that?

bye, Roman
-
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: 2006-12-02 23:15    [W:0.139 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site