From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx198.postini.com [74.125.245.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 131726B0068 for ; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:36:35 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <1351647390.4004.47.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/16] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable From: Steven Rostedt Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:36:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <1351622772-16400-1-git-send-email-levinsasha928@gmail.com> <20121030214257.GB2681@htj.dyndns.org> <1351646186.4004.41.camel@gandalf.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Sasha Levin , Tejun Heo , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, davem@davemloft.net, mingo@elte.hu, ebiederm@xmission.com, aarcange@redhat.com, ericvh@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, axboe@kernel.dk, agk@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, neilb@suse.de, ccaulfie@redhat.com, teigland@redhat.com, Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, bfields@fieldses.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, jesse@nicira.com, venkat.x.venkatsubra@oracle.com, ejt@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, dev@openvswitch.org, rds-devel@oss.oracle.com, lw@cn.fujitsu.com On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 18:25 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > ({ \ > > sizeof(val) <= 4 ? hash_32(val, bits) : hash_long(val, bits); \ > > }) > > > > Is the better way to go. We are C programmers, we like to see the ?: on > > a single line if possible. The way you have it, looks like three > > statements run consecutively. > > If we're C programmers, why use the non-standard statement-expression > at all? And split it onto three lines when it's just a single one? I like the blue color over the pink. Anyway, I was just expressing an opinion and really didn't care if it was changed or not. > > But whatever. This series has gotten way too much bike-shedding > anyway. I think it should just be applied, since it does remove lines > of code overall. I'd even possibly apply it to mainline, but it seems > to be against linux-next. I would think this change is a bit too big for an -rc4 release, but you're the boss. I've already given my ack for my code that this set touches. Let it go to Stephen's repo then. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org