Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Jul 2008 05:41:42 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: __weak vs ifdef |
| |
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:24:54 -0600 Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 02:34:55AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > We should make arch_pick_mmap_layout __weak and nuke that ifdef. > > I strongly disagree. I find it makes it harder to follow code flow > when __weak functions are involved. Ifdefs are ugly, no question, but > they're easier to grep for, see when they'll be defined and know which of > the arch_pick_mmap_layout() functions will be called. __weak certainly > has its uses (eg the sys_ni_syscall is great) but I find it's becoming > overused. > > My basic point here is that __weak makes the code easier to write but > harder to read, and we're supposed to be optimising for easier to read. >
If you see
void __weak arch_foo(...)
and can't immediately work out what's going on then converting it to an ifdef maze won't save you.
| |