lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v2)
On 11/14/2010 11:02 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>
>> What? What is wrong with static variables in functions? It really doesn't seem
>> to be a good idea to make them file-scope if they don't need to be.
>
> They are very easy to overlook and mix up with regular stack variables and i've seen
> (and introduced myself) a number of bugs due to them.
>
> They also often are used in buggy ways (with SMP not taken into consideration), so
> overlooking them during review compounds their negative effects. Putting them in
> front of the function isnt a big deal in exchange.
>
> There are people who never overlook them (like yourself), but my brain is wired up
> differently.
>

However, I have to vehemently object to putting them in a wider scope
than is otherwise necessary. I agree that static variables should be
used sparsely if at all (there really are vary few uses of them that are
valid), but putting them in a larger scope screams "I'm used in more
than one function", and that is *not* a good thing.

-hpa

--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-15 18:47    [W:0.135 / U:1.828 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site