[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4b4b2d76-7af5-5466-16ea-aad0825578a0@web.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 13:00:17 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Enrico Weigelt <lkml@...ux.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
cocci@...teme.lip6.fr, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: drivers: Inline code in devm_platform_ioremap_resource() from two
functions
>> Two function calls were combined in this function implementation.
>> Inline corresponding code so that extra error checks can be avoided here.
>
> I don't see any point to this at all.
Would you like to take another look at corresponding design options?
How do you think about to check run time characteristics any more?
> By inlining the code, you have created a clone,
> which will introduce extra work to maintain in the future.
Would you find the shown software transformation acceptable
if a C compiler will be able to generate a similar code structure?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists