Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756663AbZCFTQz (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:16:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755176AbZCFTQo (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:16:44 -0500 Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.142.185]:62908 "EHLO ti-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754516AbZCFTQn (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Mar 2009 14:16:43 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=fHvQaR4w18gmYd7klDYx6KSg+bT/47CyhAXDcxx8A8QUbbJryunpzOpxBaDe8zHWye a7jguDV5FKRgRJHuawRN1vKQQln0+zUqe+q02LxGDM2fJipk0vckcM3HcSnH//i0kNc5 xLLvbM417XcLL+6fHrE4q3QO95mzADOONcHiY= Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 22:16:41 +0300 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: Joerg Roedel , mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/18] dma-debug: add hash functions for dma_debug_entries Message-ID: <20090306191641.GF7420@localhost> References: <1236346229-6618-1-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <1236346229-6618-4-git-send-email-joerg.roedel@amd.com> <20090306135052.GE5988@nowhere> <20090306184514.GE7420@localhost> <20090306191059.GE7329@nowhere> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090306191059.GE7329@nowhere> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1596 Lines: 49 [Frederic Weisbecker - Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 08:11:00PM +0100] | On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 09:45:14PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: | > [Frederic Weisbecker - Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:50:52PM +0100] | > ... | > | > +/* | > | > + * Add an entry to a hash bucket | > | > + */ | > | > +static void hash_bucket_add(struct hash_bucket *bucket, | > | > + struct dma_debug_entry *entry) | > | > +{ | > | > + list_add_tail(&entry->list, &bucket->list); | > | > +} | > | > + | > | > +/* | > | > + * Remove entry from a hash bucket list | > | > + */ | > | > +static void hash_bucket_del(struct dma_debug_entry *entry) | > | > +{ | > | > + list_del(&entry->list); | > | > +} | > | | > | | > | Perhaps the two wrappers above are unnecessary, since they are actually | > | used once and only wrap a single list operation. No? | > | | > | Frederic. | > | > Hi Frederic, | > | > I think it would be better to make them 'inline' only but remain | > the wrappers as is, since it show logic flow and hides internal data | > details. But it's my personal opinion. | | | Yeah, I guess it's only a matter of taste :-) | Anyway, as you said, it should be inlined. Nod :) The only problem could be (it depends) -- is that if one day some locking would be needed instead of fixing one function you would need to grep all list_add/del entries :) | | - Cyrill - -- 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/