Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 05:01:30 -0700
From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>
To: Dean Nelson <dcn@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add wait_event_interruptible_exclusive() macro
Message-ID: <20040622120130.GA16246@taniwha.stupidest.org>
References: <40D30646.mailxA8X155I80@aqua.americas.sgi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <40D30646.mailxA8X155I80@aqua.americas.sgi.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 899
Lines: 30

On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 10:12:06AM -0500, Dean Nelson wrote:

> +#define __wait_event_interruptible_exclusive(wq, condition, ret)	\
> +do {									\
> +	wait_queue_t __wait;						\
> +	init_waitqueue_entry(&__wait, current);				\
> +									\
> +	add_wait_queue_exclusive(&wq, &__wait);
> \

[...]

Thsi reminds me...

I really loath all the preprocessor macros.  I know there are plenty
of this already, but I don't see the advantage of macros over (static)
inline functions which IMO look cleaner and give gcc some change to
sanitize what it's looking at without actually having to have it used.

Is there a reason why we keep doing this?


   --cw

-
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/