On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:27:13 -0800
David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> On Monday 02 March 2009, Pierre Ossman wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:48:30 -0800
> > David Brownell <davi...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> > > + */
> > > +int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct mmc_host *host, struct regulator
> > > *supply)
> > > +{
> >
> > Why not pass the vdd directly? Saves a few dereferences if nothing else.
>
> This call syntax is simpler, which is usually a win.
> Passing a third parameter would create fault paths
> of the "pass *wrong* parameter" flavor.
>
> In terms of object code, when I've looked at such things
> the dereferences generally cost the same as a ref to a
> parameter, but passing an extra parameter isn't free.
>
I couldn't see host being used in there, so I was thinking more of a
replacement, not an addition.
Rgds
--
-- Pierre Ossman
Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org
rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org
WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by the
Swedish government. Make sure your server uses encryption
for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end
encryption.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
