On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:24:40 +0900 Paul Mundt wrote:
quoted text > > +/* static helper functions */
> > +static s32 max_compare(s32 v1, s32 v2)
> > +{
> > + if (v1 < v2)
> > + return v2;
> > + else
> > + return v1;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static s32 min_compare(s32 v1, s32 v2)
> > +{
> > + if (v1 < v2)
> > + return v1;
> > + else
> > + return v2;
> > +}
> > +
> min()/max() instead?
Other code wants function pointers to the min & max functions.
That's why they are here AFAICT.
quoted text > > +/* assumes qos_lock is held */
> > +static void update_target(int i)
> > +{
> 'target' might be a more meaningful variable name.
Anything but 'i'.
---
~Randy
Phaedrus says that Quality is about caring.
-
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [RFC] QoS params patch , Randy Dunlap , (Wed Sep 26, 9:05 pm)