From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.66]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1WYRLm-0002rZ-92 for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 02:37:55 +0000 Message-ID: <5347553F.2080907@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 10:36:47 +0800 From: Wang Nan MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH]: merge identical code References: <20140408123131.GA10111@kernel-host> <0910DD04CBD6DE4193FCF86B9C00BE971FFF3A@BPXM01GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <0910DD04CBD6DE4193FCF86B9C00BE971FFF3A@BPXM01GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=twosheds.infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Atsushi Kumagai Cc: "horms@verge.net.au" , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , "hui.geng@huawei.com" On 2014/4/10 15:56, Atsushi Kumagai wrote: > Hello Wang, > >> Hi Kumagai, >> >> I found that in makedumpfile.c, there are many code like following: >> >> if (info->flag_cyclic) { >> proc_cyclic(); >> } else { >> proc(); >> } >> >> The logical and code of proc_cyclic and proc are nearly identical. >> >> Do you want to merge them together? > > Yes, I think we should do this work. > > However, the similarity of them will be reduced since how to update > cyclic region is going to be changed in v1.5.6. > If you can carry out this work also for v1.5.6, I'll accept it. > > You can use the current devel branch because it's almost v1.5.6. > (Formally, v1.5.6 will be released next week.) > > https://sourceforge.net/p/makedumpfile/code/ci/devel/tree/ > > > Thanks > Atsushi Kumagai > What about totaly remove non-cyclic functions and use a very large cyclic? _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec