Re: [net-next 3/7] ixgbe: Use static inlines instead of macros

On Jan 9, 2014, at 12:19 PM, David Miller [off-list ref] wrote:

From: "Rustad, Mark D" <redacted>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:14:51 +0000

I'm sorry you dropped my entire procedural argument for not combining the changing of the case with the implementation of the static inlines. That really was and is important! I'm not opposed to changing the case. My concern is for procedurally when and how it gets done.

quoted

Obviously I could do it here, but I *really* think it is
procedurally a really bad idea to change the case as part of a
functional change. I thought I was doing a favor my at least making
them inlines, but prehaps not.

It is never a good idea to allow functions to have all caps
names and vice versa.  Please don't use "difficulty" as a reason
to violate this.

Doing things right is sometimes hard, I'm sorry to inform you :)

It is just that sometimes things take multiple steps. This was just one step. I'm sorry that I may have not made that clear enough. Doing the work is absolutely not the problem, managing the process so everyone can continue working is a concern.

quoted

Anyone want to take on changing the upper case static inlines in
mcf8390, 7990, benet, ns83820, s2io, vxge, iwlwifi, ath9k, wil6210,
mwifiex, and rtlwifi? And those are just under drivers/net.

Sorry the "crap exists elsewhere, therefore I can make crap too"
argument never holds any water.

Just because crap exists elsewhere, doesn't mean you should duplicate it.

I'm sorry that the presence misled me into thinking that it was acceptable at least in a transitional phase.

I think I have found a way to address the barrier issue. I will add upper case macros that call the lower case inlines, so for a time both forms may exist, and then have a patch that will update the call sites, and then a patch to remove the macros.

Is that acceptable?

If only one person were working in this area and everything were serial, it would be much easier to manage this kind of change. When that is not the case, it is better for things to happen in separate steps.

-- 
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation