[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ve5otqgl.fsf@saeurebad.de>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 17:24:42 +0100
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
To: "Bert Wesarg" <bert.wesarg@...glemail.com>
Cc: "Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
"Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Jeff Garzik" <jeff@...zik.org>,
"Tejun Heo" <htejun@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] typesafe: kthread_create and kthread_run
Hi,
"Bert Wesarg" <bert.wesarg@...glemail.com> writes:
> On Jan 20, 2008 12:25 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de> wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 20 2008 20:48, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> >+ */
>> >+#define kthread_create(threadfn, data, namefmt...) ({ \
>> >+ int (*_threadfn)(typeof(data)) = (threadfn); \
>> >+ __kthread_create((void *)_threadfn, (data), namefmt); \
>> >+})
>>
>> If you have namefmt... you need that varagrs cpp trick. IIRC:
>>
>> __kthread_create((void *)_threadfn, (data), namefmt, __VA_ARGS__);
> almost
>
> either:
>
> #define kthread_create(threadfn, data, ...) ({ \
> __kthread_create((void *)_threadfn, (data), __VA_ARGS__);
>
No. This is bad because it gives the impression that it takes only two
essential arguments which is not the case.
> or:
>
> #define kthread_create(threadfn, data, namefmt, ...) ({ \
> __kthread_create((void *)_threadfn, (data), namefmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);
>
This is better. I prefer naming the rest args instead of using __VA_ARGS__:
#define kthread_create(threadfn, data, namefmt, fmtargs...) ({ \
... \
__kthread_create((void *)_threadfn, (data), namefmt, ## fmtargs) \
})
but I think that is just a matter of taste.
Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists