On Wednesday 01 December 2010 11:23:53 you wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 November 2010 22:57:29 Charles Manning wrote:
>
> I think I made these comments before, not sure what happened to them...
>
> > +
> > +/* Robustification (if it ever comes about...) */
> > +static void yaffs_retire_block(struct yaffs_dev *dev, int flash_block);
> > +static void yaffs_handle_chunk_wr_error(struct yaffs_dev *dev, int
> > nand_chunk, + int erased_ok);
> > +static void yaffs_handle_chunk_wr_ok(struct yaffs_dev *dev, int
> > nand_chunk, + const u8 * data,
> > + const struct yaffs_ext_tags *tags);
> > +static void yaffs_handle_chunk_update(struct yaffs_dev *dev, int
> > nand_chunk, + const struct yaffs_ext_tags *tags);
>
> It would be better to reorder the functions in each file so that
> you don't need forward declarations. This generally makes reading
> the code easier because it is what people expect to see. It
> also makes it clearer where you have possible recursions in the code.
Hmmm..
I too prefer minimal use of forward declaration.
Some of them are because I copied the layout of existing kernel code which
uses fwd declarations a lot. eg. fs/jffs2/dir.c and many of the examples in
Rubini & Corbet.
>
> > +
> > + T(YAFFS_TRACE_BUFFERS,
> > + (TSTR("Out of temp buffers at line %d, other held by lines:"),
> > + line_no));
> > + for (i = 0; i < YAFFS_N_TEMP_BUFFERS; i++)
> > + T(YAFFS_TRACE_BUFFERS,
> > + (TSTR(" %d "), dev->temp_buffer[i].line));
> > +
> > + T(YAFFS_TRACE_BUFFERS, (TSTR(" " TENDSTR)));
> The tracing functions are rather obscure. I would recommend dropping
> them all for now, in order to get the code included.
Yup that was a very ugly bunch of hackery to make WinCE unicode work.
I think I can pull the var-arg-foo to replace these with
yaffs_trace(YAFFS_TRACE_BUFFERS,
"Out of temp buffers at line %d, other held by lines:",line_no);
for (i = 0; i < YAFFS_N_TEMP_BUFFERS; i++)
yaffs_trace(YAFFS_TRACE_BUFFERS," %d ", dev->temp_buffer[i].line);
yaffs_trace(YAFFS_TRACE_BUFFERS, "\n");
Would that be OK?
I am loath to have to pull out useful code then plug it back in again.
> At a later
> stage, you can add standard trace points.
>
> > + return YMALLOC(dev->data_bytes_per_chunk);
I'm getting rid of those..
The reason for thew wrapping was to make portable code.
I'm replacing these with kmalloc() and then providing kmalloc() which is just
a wrapped malloc() for non-Linux use.
I am hoping to reduce this to YCHAR, _Y() and maybe one or two others.
-- Charles
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
