Re: [patch 1/2 -mm] flex_array: introduce DEFINE_FLEX_ARRAY

[Dave Hansen]

On Tue, 2009-09-01 at 20:14 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> @@ -152,7 +136,8 @@ static unsigned int index_inside_part(struct
> flex_array *fa,
>  {
>         unsigned int part_offset;
> 
> -       part_offset = element_nr % __elements_per_part(fa->element_size);
> +       part_offset = element_nr %
> +                               FLEX_ARRAY_ELEMENTS_PER_PART(fa->element_size);
>         return part_offset * fa->element_size;
>  }

This all looks pretty good.  The only issue is that the macro name
lengths have gotten a bit out of hand.  

For instance.  This:

#define FLEX_ARRAY_ELEMENTS_PER_PART(size)                             \
       (FLEX_ARRAY_PART_SIZE / size)

ends up being longer in practice than just open-coding the operation:

	FLEX_ARRAY_ELEMENTS_PER_PART(fa->element_size)                      

vs.

	(FLEX_ARRAY_PART_SIZE / fa->element_size)

and the length also ends up making for a couple of pretty ugly line
wraps.

Otherwise, this is fine with me.

Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

-- Dave

--
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/