Re: [Qemu-ppc] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 12/24] numa: add numa_[has_]node_id() wrappers

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 11:06:02AM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 10:09:18AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Fri, 5 May 2017 11:45:22 +1000
> > David Gibson <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 02:57:06PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > > wrappers should make access to [has]node_id fields more readable
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <address@hidden>  
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
> > > 
> > > Correct, though I'm not sure it actually simplifies things that much.
> > > Maybe more in future patches, though.
> > that's what Drew insisted on, and even though I prefer other way around
> > I won't stall series arguing about styling issues,
> > so here this patch goes.
> 
> My argument in the last review of this series was that references like
> 
>  machine->possible_cpus->cpus[cs->cpu_index].props.has_node_id
> and
>  machine->possible_cpus->cpus[cs->cpu_index].props.node_id
> 
> are quite long, and only differ by 'has_', making it tough to
> easily recognize.

If expression length is a problem, we can just use an extra
variable:

 CPUArchId *slot = &machine->possible_cpus->cpus[cs->cpu_index];
 if (slot->props.has_node_id && slot->props.node_id == FOO) ...


>                   But, if nobody, but me, sees value in changing
> them to
> 
>  numa_has_node_id(machine->possible_cpus, cs->cpu_index)
> and
>  numa_node_id(machine->possible_cpus, cs->cpu_index)
> 
> then I won't insist.

I don't mind that much, but I still prefer the version without
the wrappers.

-- 
Eduardo