Hi.
On 26/03/10 20:09, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 03/25/2010 11:38 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> +int sws_rw_buffer_init(int writing)
>>> +{
>>> + BUG_ON(sws_writer_buffer || sws_writer_buffer_pos);
>>
>> Please don't do that. Fail the operation instead. You can also use WARN_ON
>> or WARN if you _really_ want the user to notice the failure.
>
> It's not a failure, it's a bug when we leak memory or forgot to
> read/write all data.
>
>> BUG_ON's like this are annoying like hell for testers who trigger them.
>
> I think BUG is appropriate here (the system or image is in an
> inconsitent state for the latter condition), but if you prefer the
> WARN-family here, I can switch it to that.
>
>>> + if (writing) {
>>> + ret = sws_io_ops->write_page(sws_writer_buffer, NULL);
>>> + clear_page(sws_writer_buffer);
>>
>> Why do we need that clear_page()?
>
> Functionally for nothing, it was for my sakeness. Will remove.
>
>>> +int sws_rw_buffer_flush_page(int writing)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> + if (writing&& sws_writer_buffer_pos)
>>> + ret = sws_io_ops->write_page(sws_writer_buffer, NULL);
>>> + sws_writer_buffer_pos = writing ? 0 : PAGE_SIZE;
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>
>> I'd split the above into two functions, one for writing and the other for
>> reading.
>>
>> Doing the same with sws_rw_buffer() (under a better name), for the sake of
>> clarity, also might make some sense, apparently.
>
> Do you mean adding hib*_buffer_read + hib*_buffer_write which would call
> static hib*_rw_buffer? sws_rw_buffer has much common code for R and W,
> so I would not make 2 functions from that.
>
> Nigel, you use _rw_ functions in toi, are there any pros opposing to _r_
> + _w_ (apart from exporting twice as symbols)?
I forget now why I used rw functions to begin with (it's been a long
time!). I do know I've never worried about exporting twice as many symbols.
As I look at the code now, I think it makes more sense to split things
up. This is especially true when I consider that a user with 4 cores has
driven me to work on scalability, which will only diverge the code paths
more.
Regards,
Nigel
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
