Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 09:31:54 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        NFS <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] SCHED: allow wait_on_bit functions to support a
 timeout.
Message-ID: <20140430073154.GW11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20140429194406.06c580b8@notabene.brown>
 <20140429103217.GQ27561@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20140430122926.6bb0c771@notabene.brown>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <20140430122926.6bb0c771@notabene.brown>
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:29:26PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> If you think it is a good cleanup I'll post a proper patch with all the right
> Cc:s.

Yeah, its a good cleanup. Thanks!

> +static inline int
> +wait_on_bit(void *word, int bit, unsigned mode)
> +{
> +	if (!test_bit(bit, word))
> +		return 0;
> +	return out_of_line_wait_on_bit(word, bit,
> +				       bit_wait,
> +				       mode & 65535);
> +}
> +
> +static inline int
> +wait_on_bit_io(void *word, int bit, unsigned mode)
> +{
> +	if (!test_bit(bit, word))
> +		return 0;
> +	return out_of_line_wait_on_bit(word, bit,
> +				       bit_wait_io,
> +				       mode & 65535);
> +}

That actually fits on one <80 line. Also, where does the 16 bit mask
come from? On which, I would write that in hex, 0xFFFF is slightly
easier to recognise as (1<<16)-1.