lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: simplify procfs code for seq_file instances
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 08:19:16AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > I want to ask if it is time to start using poorman function overloading
> > > with _b_c_e(). There are millions of allocation functions for example,
> > > all slightly difference, and people will add more. Seeing /proc interfaces
> > > doubled like this is painful.
> >
> > Function overloading is totally unacceptable.
> >
> > And I very much disagree with a tradeoff that keeps 5000 lines of
> > code vs a few new helpers.
>
> OK, the curiosity and suspense are killing me. What the heck is
> "function overloading with _b_c_e()"?

The way I understood Alexey was to use have a proc_create macro
that can take different ops types. Although the short cut for
__builtin_types_compatible_p would be _b_t_c or similar, so maybe
I misunderstood him.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-24 18:06    [W:0.091 / U:0.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site