lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] x86: rename PTE_MASK to PTE_PFN_MASK

* Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:

> On Tuesday 22 July 2008 18:36:26 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
> > > Rusty, in his peevish way, complained that macros defining constants
> > > should have a name which somewhat accurately reflects the actual
> > > purpose of the constant.
> >
> > Applied to tip/x86/cleanups anyway. Rusty will find out himself how bad
> > this whole concept of clean and understandable code is, soon enough!
>
> I am disgusted with this inappropriate emphasis on clarity over
> obscurity. It should be pretty clear to everyone here that we can't
> have both!
>
> Fortunately, there is a way to partially rectify the situation. Ingo,
> please apply.

> +/* There's something suspicious about this line: see PTE_PFN_MASK comment. */
> #define __PHYSICAL_MASK ((phys_addr_t)(1ULL << __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT) - 1)

> /* PTE_PFN_MASK extracts the PFN from a (pte|pmd|pud|pgd)val_t */
> +/* This line is quite subtle. See __PHYSICAL_MASK comment above. */
> #define PTE_PFN_MASK ((pteval_t)PHYSICAL_PAGE_MASK)

Now that you and Jeremy have thoroughly destroyed this file's obscurity
with your disgusting cleanups and clarifications, i fear it's beyond
repair. No matter how much i'd love to apply this infinitely recursive
piece of documentation (what a genius it takes to even think of it!) i
regret that i cannot. So sad.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-07-22 13:59    [W:0.053 / U:0.176 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site