linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
To: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
	microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, jeremy.kerr@canonical.com,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] of/device: populate platform_device (of_device) resource table on allocation
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:01:40 -0600 (MDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100610.100140.8559628065321695.imp@bsdimp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100610154741.GA7484@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>

In message: <20100610154741.GA7484@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
            Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@gmail.com> writes:
: On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 09:13:57AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: [...]
: > : >> I told you several ways of how to improve the code (based on
: > : >> the ideas from drivers/base/, so the ideas aren't even mine,
: > : >> fwiw).
: > : >
: > : > I tend to agree with Anton here.
: > : 
: > : The reason I'm confident doing it that way is that it is *not* a
: > : structure.  There is no structure relationship between the resource
: > : table and the platform_device other than they are allocated with the
: > : same kzalloc() call.  All the code that cares about that is contained
: > : within 4 lines of code.  I'm resistant to using a structure because it
: > : is adds an additional 5-6 lines of code to add a structure that won't
: > : be used anywhere else, and is only 4 lines to begin with.
: > 
: > I tend to agree with Grant here.  The idiom he's using is very wide
: > spread in the industry and works extremely well.  It keeps the
: > ugliness confined to a couple of lines and is less ugly than the
: > alternatives for this design pattern.  It is a little surprising when
: > you see the code the first time, granted, but I think its expressive
: > power trumps that small surprise.
: 
: Oh, come on. Both constructions are binary equivalent.
: 
: So how can people seriously be with *that* code:
: 
: 	dev->resource = (void *)&dev[1];
: 
: which, semantically, is a nonsense and asks for a fix.

It isn't nonsense.  That's just your opinion of it, nothing more.

: While
: 	dev_obj->dev.resource = dev_obj->resource;
: 
: simply makes sense.

But this requires extra, bogus fields in the structure and creates a
bogus sizeof issue.

There are problems both ways.  Yelling about it isn't going to make
you any more right, or convince me that I'm wrong.  It is an argument
that is at least two decades old...

Warner

  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-10 16:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-08 14:26 [PATCH 0/6] OF device code merges and improvements Grant Likely
2010-06-08 14:26 ` [PATCH 1/6] of: Use full node name in resource structures Grant Likely
2010-06-08 14:26 ` [PATCH 2/6] of/device: merge of_device_uevent Grant Likely
2010-06-08 14:26 ` [PATCH 3/6] of: Modify of_device_get_modalias to be passed struct device Grant Likely
2010-06-08 14:26 ` [PATCH 4/6] of/device: Merge of_platform_bus_probe() Grant Likely
2010-06-08 14:26 ` [PATCH 5/6] of: Merge of_device_alloc Grant Likely
2010-06-08 14:26 ` [PATCH 6/6] of/device: populate platform_device (of_device) resource table on allocation Grant Likely
2010-06-08 15:57   ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-06-08 16:02     ` Grant Likely
2010-06-08 16:46       ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-06-08 18:41         ` Grant Likely
2010-06-08 19:48           ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-06-10  6:17             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-06-10 14:18               ` Grant Likely
2010-06-10 15:13                 ` M. Warner Losh
2010-06-10 15:47                   ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-06-10 16:01                     ` M. Warner Losh [this message]
2010-06-10 16:52                       ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-06-10 17:09                         ` Mitch Bradley
2010-06-10 17:20                           ` Grant Likely
2010-06-10 17:09                         ` M. Warner Losh
2010-06-11  1:14                       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-06-10 16:30                     ` Grant Likely
2010-06-10 17:10                       ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-06-10 17:21                         ` Grant Likely

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100610.100140.8559628065321695.imp@bsdimp.com \
    --to=imp@bsdimp.com \
    --cc=cbouatmailru@gmail.com \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=jeremy.kerr@canonical.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).