On Saturday 19 January 2008 10:12:33 Tejun Heo wrote: > Type safety is good but I doubt this would be worth the complexity. It > has some benefits but there's much larger benefit in keeping things in > straight C. People know that functions take fixed types and are also > familiar with the convention of passing void * for callback arguments. > IMHO, staying in line with those common knowledges easily trumps having > type checking on interrupt handler.
I sympathise with this argument, but I think just because people are familiar with existing hacks shouldn't prevent improvement. I think the resulting code is clearer and more readable. Even in the implementation, the tricky part is the check_either_type() macro: the rest is straight-forward. > Also, how often do we see a bug where things go wrong because interrupt > handler is given the wrong type of argument? Even when such bug > happens, I doubt it can escape the developer's workstation if he/she is > paying any attention to testing. I agree this one is unlikely. But I am trying to spread type-safety more widely (see previous kthread patches). I like changing the kernel to make life simpler for developers. We don't do enough of it. Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
