Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Feb 2000 17:57:52 +0100 | From | almesber@lrc ... | Subject | Re: Kernel bugs found using inspect tool |
| |
Peter T. Breuer wrote: >> Then you'd also duplicate a lot of other, common, and quite hairy code. > > Which should then be put into functional subunits?
Most of them would be just one or two lines, and probably harder to understand than the original code. Also, they all share a few common variables (e.g. dma_wr, size), so you'd end up with a comparably fat interface and/or you'd give gcc's ability to merge common expressions in inlined functions a pretty good test.
> I already spent a couple of years (back a couple of years) retrofitting > atm codes into 2.0.*! I know.
Oh, I didn't expect it to be _that_ bad :-(
- Werner
-- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, ICA, EPFL, CH werner.almesberger@ica.epfl.ch / /_IN_N_032__Tel_+41_21_693_6621__Fax_+41_21_693_6610_____________________/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |