| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 15/35] subarch support for controlling interr
es, which is why I measured that one as well.
>
> Now, the original concern was that we have the five operations implemented
> as multi-line macros and doing a hybrid solution doesn't really address
> that.
If it's straight-forward to convert to an inline do it. If not keep
it as a macro. After all code style is just a tool, not something
self serving.
>
> Also, it's not quite clear to me what's the best way to turn three of
> the five into functions, whether inline or not.
>
> For measuring the sizes, I did the following:
> add void ___restore_flags(unsigned long *x) with the implementation
> and then:
> #define __restore_flags(x) ___restore_flags(&(x))
Yes that is the standard way to do it
> Alternatively, would it make sense to change __restore_flags to take
> a pointer to flags instead? That would be quite an invasive change...
No.
-Andi
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home