On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > +retry:
> > + pte.pte_low = ptep->pte_low;
> > + smp_rmb();
> > + pte.pte_high = ptep->pte_high;
> > + smp_rmb();
> > + if (unlikely(pte.pte_low != ptep->pte_low))
> > + goto retry;
>
> What about using `do { ... } while (...)' instead?
Partly because it's not a loop. It's an error and retry event, and it
generally happens zero times (and sometimes once). I don't think it should
even _look_ like a loop.
So personally, I just tend to think that it's just more readable when it's
written as being obviously not a regular loop. I'm not in the "gotos are
harmful" camp.
And partly because I tend to distrust loops for these thigns is that
historically gcc sometimes did stupid things for loops (it assumed that
loops were hot and tried to align them etc, and the same didn't happen for
branch targets). Of course, these days I suspect gcc can't even tell the
difference any more (it probably turns it into the same internal
representation), but old habits die hard.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
