Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932920Ab2JaB0K (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:26:10 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:45040 "EHLO mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751271Ab2JaB0I (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:26:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1351646186.4004.41.camel@gandalf.local.home> References: <1351622772-16400-1-git-send-email-levinsasha928@gmail.com> <20121030214257.GB2681@htj.dyndns.org> <1351646186.4004.41.camel@gandalf.local.home> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 18:25:46 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: wWDM1WiVdO6qdwE02jwZSm4jV8U Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/16] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Sasha Levin , Tejun Heo , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, davem@davemloft.net, mingo@elte.hu, ebiederm@xmission.com, aarcange@redhat.com, ericvh@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, axboe@kernel.dk, agk@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, neilb@suse.de, ccaulfie@redhat.com, teigland@redhat.com, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, bfields@fieldses.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, jesse@nicira.com, venkat.x.venkatsubra@oracle.com, ejt@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, dev@openvswitch.org, rds-devel@oss.oracle.com, lw@cn.fujitsu.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1041 Lines: 24 On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > ({ \ > sizeof(val) <= 4 ? hash_32(val, bits) : hash_long(val, bits); \ > }) > > Is the better way to go. We are C programmers, we like to see the ?: on > a single line if possible. The way you have it, looks like three > statements run consecutively. If we're C programmers, why use the non-standard statement-expression at all? And split it onto three lines when it's just a single one? But whatever. This series has gotten way too much bike-shedding anyway. I think it should just be applied, since it does remove lines of code overall. I'd even possibly apply it to mainline, but it seems to be against linux-next. Linus -- 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/