Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754970AbXLSC4R (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:56:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751672AbXLSC4F (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:56:05 -0500 Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.235]:35885 "EHLO nz-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751299AbXLSC4D convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:56:03 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=jrHnwGqA/dwvbcronzgC/ZkW9h8L+3Xb9u8xvalyFlTIEWMNZJN+YV7PGFSRVzaMYlBnf4+KbFXCPbp5LXkLs1zpDs69QFn0LKBjZUAOnso6x0MRKvEuGK64+e2tyu+Jc3X9njbh+ptz7n3ulolV6n5nDPS4kfLqaoj059+gXHg= Message-ID: <5d6222a80712181856l4f24104ei38ecd2e9f0c6422e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:56:01 -0200 From: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" To: "Frans Pop" Subject: Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration Cc: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" , ak@suse.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws, avi@qumranet.com, chrisw@sous-sol.org, ehabkost@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, jeremy@goop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, roland@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, zach@vmware.com In-Reply-To: <200712182232.45685.elendil@planet.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <1198008293639-git-send-email-gcosta@redhat.com> <5d6222a80712181300l707035e7mdb8a6e0d7a5ddca8@mail.gmail.com> <200712182232.45685.elendil@planet.nl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1546 Lines: 38 On Dec 18, 2007 7:32 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > > > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > > > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are > > > > moved to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files are > > > > deleted. Note that there's much less headers included in the final > > > > version. > > > > > > Either I must be missing something or this patch was corrupted somehow. > > > > neither. > > Note the else in the middle. It's just a mistake in the comment. > > Wouldn't an explicit second #ifdef block be a lot clearer (and improve > maintainability) in this case? > > An #else can easily be overlooked among other preprocessor commands or when > #ifdefs get nested. > I don't think so. a if-then-else kind of construction is very common, well expected, and heavily used in kernel. But even if I?m not right, this is functionally correct, and can be addressed in a later cleanup patch if you really want to. -- Glauber de Oliveira Costa. "Free as in Freedom" http://glommer.net "The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act." -- 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/