[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1237053903.3144.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 23:35:03 +0530
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] x86: cpu/intel.c cleanup
On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 18:04 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2009-03-14 at 16:31 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I don't really like this change (last hunk). Doesn't it seem a
> > > > bit pointless? It breaks the symmetry with the masked CPUID
> > > > levels at the beginning of the function. If somebody wants to
> > > > add something else to this function, it might have to be
> > > > reindented again. Or is there a problem with too long lines
> > > > here?
> > >
> > > yes, it would be cleaner to put the whole family 15 branch into
> > > a helper inline function instead.
> > >
> >
> > OK, better I keep it unchanged :-)
>
> Why not implement the cleanup i suggested?
I followed your approached and made new helper function. But the result
was same, in that helper function I have to check for family 15 and rest
of things. So I found nothing was gained, So I again reverted it and
provided you this patch.
Thanks,
--
JSR
--
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