> > But this seems like it is a lot of churn to avoid having separate > > functions to search control and monitor lists. Each a clone of > > the existing ~24 line rdt_find_domain() with just the type changed > > for the return value and the list travsersal. > > Yes. Sorry, I did not realize this implication during the earlier > discussions. > > > > > What do you think? > > > > It sounds to me as though you are advocating for open coding > rdt_find_ctrl_domain() and rdt_find_mon_domain()? That sounds good > to me. Reinette, While there is some churn, it maybe isn't all that bad. I also ran the open coding case and having a pair of 24-line functions one after the other with just two trivial lines changed between them is unlikely to get past the x86 maintainers without running this same conversation again. -Tony
