Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:54:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:54:39 -0400 Received: from pD9E23260.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.226.50.96]:39560 "EHLO hawkeye.luckynet.adm") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:54:39 -0400 Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 08:00:33 -0600 (MDT) From: Thunder from the hill X-X-Sender: thunder@hawkeye.luckynet.adm To: Christoph Hellwig cc: Thunder from the hill , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Rik van Riel , Tomas Szepe , Zach Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH][2.5] Single linked headed lists for Linux, v3 In-Reply-To: <20020928144722.A356@infradead.org> Message-ID: X-Location: Dorndorf/Steudnitz; Germany MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1053 Lines: 26 Hi, On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > All of those are utter crap. Older gcc's had some little inlining > problems that generated suboptimal code, but that's cured now and I > don't thikn it even made a difference for the small list_* functions. I think if we scale slists to be like lists, we don't need to make the difference at all. slists are supposed to be lightweight lists, single direction, and working anywhere on any type of structure. (e.g. you can access a whole struct thread through the ->next pointer, instead of further crap.) If we can avoid type dependency, we should do now. If you want inlined code, go read list.h. (I remember that's why the lists were called `type-safe', BTW. Meant to be type-preserve, and definitely the same type as before.) Thunder -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/