On Thu, 6 Nov 2014, Seth Jennings wrote: > > Thanks a lot for having started the work on this! > > > > We will be reviewing it carefully in the coming days and will getting back > > to you (I was surprised to see that that diffstat indicates that it's > > actually more code than our whole kgraft implementation including the > > consistency model :) ). > > The structure allocation and sysfs stuff is a lot of (mundane) code. > Lots of boring error path handling too.
Also, lpc_create_object(), lpc_create_func(), lpc_create_patch(), lpc_create_objects(), lpc_create_funcs(), ... they all are pretty much alike, and are asking for some kind of unification ... perhaps iterator for generic structure initialization? I am not also really fully convinced that we need the patch->object->funcs abstraction hierarchy (which also contributes to the structure allocation being rather a spaghetti copy/paste code) ... wouldn't patch->funcs be suffcient, with the "object" being made just a property of the function, for example? > Plus, I show that kernel/kgraft.c + kernel/kgraft_files.c is > 906+193=1099. I'd say they are about the same size :) Which is still seem to me to be a ratio worth thinking about improving :) Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- 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/
