[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090618194521.GA7464@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:45:21 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Greg Ungerer <gerg@...pgear.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gerg@...inux.org,
linux-m68k@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] m68k: merge the mmu and non-mmu versions of checksum.h
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 05:11:15PM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> /*
> * This is a version of ip_compute_csum() optimized for IP headers,
> * which always checksum on 4 octet boundaries.
> @@ -59,6 +61,9 @@ static inline __sum16 ip_fast_csum(const void *iph, unsigned int ihl)
> : "memory");
> return (__force __sum16)~sum;
> }
> +#else
> +__sum16 ip_fast_csum(const void *iph, unsigned int ihl);
> +#endif
Any good reason this is inline for all mmu processors and out of line
for nommu, independent of the actual cpu variant?
> static inline __sum16 csum_fold(__wsum sum)
> {
> unsigned int tmp = (__force u32)sum;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_COLDFIRE
> + tmp = (tmp & 0xffff) + (tmp >> 16);
> + tmp = (tmp & 0xffff) + (tmp >> 16);
> + return (__force __sum16)~tmp;
> +#else
> __asm__("swap %1\n\t"
> "addw %1, %0\n\t"
> "clrw %1\n\t"
> @@ -74,6 +84,7 @@ static inline __sum16 csum_fold(__wsum sum)
> : "=&d" (sum), "=&d" (tmp)
> : "0" (sum), "1" (tmp));
> return (__force __sum16)~sum;
> +#endif
> }
I think this would be cleaner by having totally separate functions
for both cases, e.g.
#ifdef CONFIG_COLDFIRE
static inline __sum16 csum_fold(__wsum sum)
{
unsigned int tmp = (__force u32)sum;
tmp = (tmp & 0xffff) + (tmp >> 16);
tmp = (tmp & 0xffff) + (tmp >> 16);
return (__force __sum16)~tmp;
}
#else
...
#endif
--
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