lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] x86: merge nmi_32-64 to nmi.c
On Sat, 17 May 2008, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008, Tom Spink wrote:
>
> > static inline unsigned int get_nmi_count(int cpu)
> > {
> > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > return cpu_pda(cpu)->__nmi_count;
> > #else
> > return nmi_count(cpu);
> > #endif
> > }
> >
> > I know it introduces a lot of these conditionals, but at least there
> > is one place to look for the get_nmi_count function, instead of
> > searching for all variants of the function.
>
> Well, I suppose some header should provide a definition like:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> #define cpu_x86_64 1
> #else
> #define cpu_x86_64 0
> #endif
>
> and the you can remove the horrible #ifdef clutter and make the quoted
> function look like:
>
> static inline unsigned int get_nmi_count(int cpu)
> {
> return cpu_x86_64 ? cpu_pda(cpu)->__nmi_count : nmi_count(cpu);
> }
>
> Much better -- isn't it?

Definitely, but we should do it at the Kconfig level which allows us
to have integer defines as well, so we end up with something like:

static inline unsigned int get_nmi_count(int cpu)
{
return CONFIG_X86_64 ? cpu_pda(cpu)->__nmi_count : nmi_count(cpu);
}

That way we do not even have to think about which header to select for
the include and the association of the selector is stronger than the
cpu_x86_64 one, isn't it ?

Thanks,
tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-17 23:43    [W:0.098 / U:11.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site