[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F833CDF.4080300@parallels.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 23:47:43 +0400
From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
To: Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>
CC: "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"serge.hallyn@...onical.com" <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
"criu@...nvz.org" <criu@...nvz.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi" <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
"mtk.manpages@...il.com" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [CRIU] [PATCH 2/4] ipc: move all checkpoint-restore code under
appropriate define
On 04/09/2012 09:54 PM, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
> All new checkpoint/restore code parts are now covered with
> CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE marco. So it would be easy to remove them, in case
> the whole project fails.
>
> ---
> ipc/compat.c | 9 ++++++---
> ipc/msg.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> @@ -387,8 +388,10 @@ long compat_sys_msgrcv(int first, int second, int msgtyp, int third,
> msgtyp = ipck.msgtyp;
> }
> return do_msgrcv(first, uptr, second, msgtyp, third,
> - (third & MSG_PEEK_ALL) ? compat_do_msg_peek_all
> - : compat_do_msg_fill);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE
> + (third & MSG_PEEK_ALL) ? compat_do_msg_peek_all :
> +#endif
> + compat_do_msg_fill);
These ifdefs in the middle of the code look not very elegant. Is there a way
to replace the checks they surround with static inline function (reporting
0 when CHECKPOINT_RESTORE is off) potentially letting the compiler optimize
out the code sitting under if (0) ?
> }
>
> static inline int get_compat_msqid64(struct msqid64_ds *m64,
> diff --git a/ipc/msg.c b/ipc/msg.c
> index 017bf0b..8d63cc7 100644
--
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