Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:32:31 +0200 | From | Martin Schwidefsky <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][patch 02/12] remove clocksource inline functions |
| |
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:57:13 -0600 dwalker@fifo99.com wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-29 at 16:44 +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:15:19 -0600 > > dwalker@fifo99.com wrote: > > > > > > Remove clocksource_read, clocksource_enable and clocksource_disable > > > > inline functions. No functional change. > > > > > > > > > > Your still not really explaining this one, is this suppose to be > > > cleaner? Or is this related to some other part of your clean up? > > > > The only one of the three inline functions that is a bit more > > complicated is clocksource_enable() because of the mult_orig logic. But > > that goes away with a later patch. The function aren't accessors either, > > they are used exclusively by the timekeeping code. In short, they are > > useless, don't you think? > > Above is what should go in your patch description ..
Ok, sounds reasonable.
> The reason that I'm not totally into this one is cause these inlines > help to document to the code.. > > If you have , > > struct clocksource cs; > > then several lines later you have > > cs->read(); > > vs, > > clocksource_read(cs); > > The later is completely clear, and the former isn't.. Instead of "cs" > you could pick any obscure name, and read() isn't exactly unique.. So > really any function in the clocksource structure has the potential for a > helper, and the inlines don't really cost anything ..
Hmm, you have an object of type struct clocksource and you do cs->read(cs). If that is not clear enough then I don't know what is. We do that all over the place in the linux kernel. And I personally find these useless wrappers rather annoying. I don't like to have to jump to another place to find out that it just calls the read function of the object.
-- blue skies, Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
| |