On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 11:20 -0600, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 10:17:48AM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > Please drop the CPU_FTR_##x macro magic as it makes grepping more > > complicated. If the enum names are too long, just do s/CPU_FTR_/CPU_/g > > or something similar. Also, could you please make this a static inline > > function?
I tend to agree with Pekka... > I considered that for a while, but decided against it because: > > * cpu-has-feature(cpu-feature-foo) v cpu-has-feature(foo): I picked the > latter for readability. I don't think it really matters compared to the usefullness of grep, and is still more readable than the old way... > * Renaming CPU_FTR_<x> -> CPU_<x> makes it less obvious that > it's actually a cpu feature it's describing (i.e. CPU_ALTIVEC vs > CPU_FTR_ALTIVEC). Agreed. > * Renaming would clobber the namespace, CPU_* definitions are used in > other places in the tree. > * Can't make it an inline and still use the preprocessor concatenation. I'd like to keep the constants as-is and have the stuff inline with no macro trick as Pekka suggest since I did use grep on those things quite often. > That being said, you do have a point about grepability. However, > personally I'd be more likely to look for CPU_HAS_FEATURE than the > feature itself when reading the code, and would find that easily. The > other way around (finding all uses of a feature) is harder, but the > concatenation macro is right below the bit definitions and easy to spot. No, when I grep, i'm looking for the feature itself... Ben. - 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/