Re: [PATCH 2/2] page table iterators

[Nick Piggin]

Hugh Dickins wrote:
> At one stage I was adding unlikelies to all the p??_bads, then it
> seemed more sensible to hide that in a new macro (which of course
> must do the none and bad tests inline, before going off to the function).

Yeah that sounds OK. I think (un)likely can propagate through
inline functions too, if that's any help to you.

> We could at little cost.  But I think if these messages come up at all,
> they're likely to come up in clumps, where the backtrace won't actually
> be giving any interesting info, and the quantity of them be a nuisance
> itself.  I'd rather leave it to the next person who gets the error and
> wants the backtrace to add it.

You're probably right - I know when I see them (from my
hacking up the code) they usually come in clumps :P

Nick

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/