On Mon, 07 Sep, at 02:28:14PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 08:02:21PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > };
> >
> > +static struct test *tests[] = {
> > + generic_tests,
> > + arch_tests,
> > +};
> > +
> > static bool perf_test__matches(struct test *test, int curr, int argc,
> > const char *argv[])
> > {
> > int i;
> > @@ -237,7 +229,11 @@ static int run_test(struct test *test)
> > return err;
> > }
> >
> > -#define for_each_test(t) for (t = &tests[0]; t->func; t++)
> > +static unsigned int ___j; /* This is obviously not thread-safe */
> > +
> > +#define for_each_test(t) \
> > + for (___j = 0; ___j < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); ___j++) \
> > + for (t = &tests[___j][0]; t->func; t++)
>
> why not have ____j on stack and pas it into for_each_test
>
> for_each_test(j, t)
> ...
Right, I made a conscious decision to not do that because I didn't
want the caller to have to care about providing an iterator variable.
It also makes the diff slightly bigger.
But I don't feel that strongly about it, so I'll make this change.
--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
