[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130516203236.GG5904@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:32:36 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: ebiederm@...ssion.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, cpw@....com,
kumagai-atsushi@....nes.nec.co.jp, lisa.mitchell@...com,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
zhangyanfei@...fujitsu.com, jingbai.ma@...com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
riel@...hat.com, walken@...gle.com, hughd@...gle.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/8] vmcore: allocate ELF note segment in the 2nd
kernel vmalloc memory
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:06:14PM +0900, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
[..]
> +static int __init get_note_number_and_size_elf32(const Elf32_Ehdr *ehdr_ptr,
> + int *nr_ptnote, u64 *phdr_sz)
> +{
> + return process_note_headers_elf32(ehdr_ptr, nr_ptnote, phdr_sz, NULL);
> +}
> +
> +static int __init copy_notes_elf32(const Elf32_Ehdr *ehdr_ptr, char *notes_buf)
> +{
> + return process_note_headers_elf32(ehdr_ptr, NULL, NULL, notes_buf);
> +}
> +
Please don't do this. We need to create two separate functions doing
two different operations and not just create wrapper around a function
which does two things.
I know both functions will have similar for loops for going through
the elf notes but it is better then doing function overloading based
on parameters passed.
Vivek
--
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