On Mon, 2022-12-05 at 09:03 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 12/5/22 08:33, Kristen Carlson Accardi wrote: > > The helpers were added because Jarrko requested a queue abstraction > > for > > the sgx_epc_lru_lists data structure in the first round of reviews. > > the > > simple one line inlines are effectively just renaming to make the > > queue > > abstraction more obvious to the reader. > > Jarkko, > > Do you have any issues with zapping these helpers? I really don't > think > they add to readability. The "reclaimable" versus "unreclaimable" > naming is patently obvious from the structure member names. I'm not > sure what value it adds to have them in the function names too. > > Well, there's sort of 2 things I would want clarity on before my next revision. One is obviously deleting the wrappers for unreclaimable and reclaimable pushes etc. The other is deleting the wrappers for the list operations (the push/pop/peek queue abstractions) and whether those are desired.
