Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg_double

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 01/21/2011 01:26 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 09:31:02AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>> On 1/8/11 7:24 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> Call me weird but I like this one than others.  It sure is ugly but
>>> the operation itself isn't a particularly pretty so it kinda matches.
>>> Also, this one is the least error prone and more consistent with other
>>> cpu ops.
>>
>> So what are we going to do about this patch? I'd love to merge
>> Christoph's SLUB patches for linux-next now that .38-rc1 is out.
> 
> At least you like it, which is good.
> 
> I don't think the currently proposed one with two separate parameters
> is significantly better than other alternatives and vice-versa.  They
> all have slightly different ugliness and error proneness issues.
> 
> That said, I still like the double parameter one best, and, unless
> there are distinctively good reasons to choose another one, I'm gonna
> commit it to percpu tree in a few days so that merge can proceed.  So,
> if you have something to say, now would be a good time to assert it.
> 

I really object to passing two pointers where one of them has to be a
fixed offset to the other.  That really doesn't make any sense.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/