[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200729145507.GW23808@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 15:55:07 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, will@...nel.org, a.darwish@...utronix.de,
tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...nel.org, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net,
davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] seqlock: Fold seqcount_LOCKNAME_t definition
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 03:52:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Manual repetition is boring and error prone.
Yes, but generated functions are hard to grep for, and I'm pretty sure
that kernel-doc doesn't know how to expand macros into comments that it
can then extract documentation from.
I've been thinking about how to cure this (mostly in the context
of page-flags.h). I don't particularly like the C preprocessor, but
m4 is worse and defining our own preprocessing language seems like a
terrible idea.
So I was thinking about moving the current contents of page-flags.h
to include/src/page-flags.h, making linux/page-flags.h depend on
src/page-flags.h and run '$(CPP) -C' to generate it. I've been a little
busy recently and haven't had time to do more than muse about this, but
I think it might make sense for some of our more heavily macro-templated
header files.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists