[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160920094223.GR5012@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 11:42:23 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>,
Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] jump_labels: Add API to deal with keys embedded in
structures
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 06:21:27PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> It is desirable to allow static keys to be integrated in structures,
> as it can lead do slightly more readable code. But the current API
> only provides DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_TRUE/FALSE, which is not exactly
> nice and leads to the following idiom:
>
> static struct {
> int foo;
> struct static_key_false key;
> } bar = {
> .key = STATIC_KEY_FALSE_INIT,
> };
>
> [...]
>
> if (static_branch_unlikely(&bar.key))
> foo = -1;
>
> which doesn't follow the recommended API, and uses the internals
> of the static key implementation.
>
> This patch introduces DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_TRUE/FALSE, as well as
> INIT_STATIC_KEY_TRUE/FALSE, which abstract such construct and
> allow the internals to evolve without having to fix everything else:
>
> static struct {
> int foo;
> DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(key);
> } bar = {
> INIT_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(.key),
> };
Hurm..
I think I like the first better, it looks more like actual C. Either way
around you need to now manually match up the type and initializer.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists