Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:45:03 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Alan Cox <alc@rice.edu> Cc: Alan Cox <alc@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: minidump size on amd64 Message-ID: <4CD996AF.2070300@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4CD8FFFF.3070106@rice.edu> References: <4CA0DA49.2090006@freebsd.org> <4CA3A48A.5070300@freebsd.org> <4CA3BD1E.5070807@rice.edu> <4CA5911E.3000101@freebsd.org> <4CAE0060.7050607@freebsd.org> <4CAECC4D.90707@rice.edu> <4CD1AA45.7000504@freebsd.org> <4CD1AD80.2090903@rice.edu> <4CD1D4AA.3060309@freebsd.org> <4CD8FFFF.3070106@rice.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 09/11/2010 10:02 Alan Cox said the following:
> The kernel portion of the patch looks correct. If I were to make one stylistic
> suggestion, it would be to make the control flow of the outer and inner loops as
> similar as possible, that is,
>
> for (...
> if ((pdp[i] & PG_V) == 0) {
> ...
> continue;
> }
> if ((pdp[i] & PG_PS) != 0) {
> ...
> continue;
> }
> for (...
> if ((pd[j] & PG_V) == 0)
> continue;
> if ((pd[j] & PG_PS) != 0) {
> ...
> continue;
> }
> for (...
> if ((pt[x] & PG_V) == 0)
> continue;
> ...
>
> I think this would make the code a little easier to follow.
This is a very nice suggestion, thank you.
Besides the uniformity some horizontal space is saved too :-)
Updated patch (only kernel part) is here:
http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/amd64-minidump.5.diff
--
Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CD996AF.2070300>