[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080403143341.GA9603@duo.random>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 17:00:48 +0200
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, Robin Holt <holt@....com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>, Izik Eidus <izike@...ranet.com>,
kvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
Kanoj Sarcar <kanojsarcar@...oo.com>, steiner@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
daniel.blueman@...drics.com, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: EMM: Fixup return value handling of emm_notify()
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 12:40:46PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> It seems to me that common code can be shared using functions? No need
> FWIW I prefer separate methods.
kvm patch using mmu notifiers shares 99% of the code too between the
two different methods implemented indeed. Code sharing is the same and
if something pointer to functions will be faster if gcc isn't smart or
can't create a compile time hash to jump into the right address
without having to check every case: .
--
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