From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
benh@kernel.crashing.org, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] page table iterators
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 06:35:24 +0000 (GMT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0502210619290.7925@goblin.wat.veritas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4218840D.6030203@yahoo.com.au>
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > The problem is just that these walker macros when they
> > do all the lazy walking stuff will be quite complicated.
> > And I don't really want another uaccess.h-like macro mess.
> >
> > Yes currently they look simple, but that will change.
>
> But even in that case, it will still be better to have the
> extra complexity once in the macro rather than throughout mm/
>
> > Open coding is probably the smaller evil.
> > And they're really not changed that often.
My opinion FWIW: I'm all for regularizing the pagetable loops to
work the same way, changing their variables to use the same names,
improving their efficiency; but I do like to see what a loop is up to.
list_for_each and friends are very widely used, they're fine, and I'm
quite glad to have their prefetching hidden away from me; but usually
I groan, grin and bear it, each time someone devises a clever new
for_each macro concealing half the details of some specialist loop.
In a minority?
Hugh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-21 6:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-17 13:53 [PATCH 1/2] optimise copy page range Nick Piggin
2005-02-17 14:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] page table iterators Nick Piggin
2005-02-17 15:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-02-17 16:13 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-17 19:43 ` Andi Kleen
2005-02-17 22:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-17 23:03 ` Andi Kleen
2005-02-17 23:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-17 23:34 ` Andi Kleen
2005-02-17 23:30 ` David S. Miller
2005-02-17 23:57 ` Andi Kleen
2005-02-20 12:35 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-21 6:35 ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2005-02-21 6:40 ` Andrew Morton
2005-02-21 7:09 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-21 8:09 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-21 9:04 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-22 9:54 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-23 2:06 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-02-23 4:31 ` David S. Miller
2005-02-23 4:49 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-23 4:57 ` David S. Miller
2005-02-23 5:23 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-23 23:52 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-24 0:00 ` David S. Miller
2005-02-24 5:12 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-02-24 5:59 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-24 11:58 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-02-24 19:33 ` David S. Miller
2005-02-25 10:44 ` Andi Kleen
2005-02-24 21:59 ` Nick Piggin
2005-02-24 22:32 ` Hugh Dickins
2005-02-24 22:52 ` Nick Piggin
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=Pine.LNX.4.61.0502210619290.7925@goblin.wat.veritas.com \
--to=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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).