On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 09:10:06AM -0700, jbarnes wrote: > On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 05:32:50PM -0700, David Mosberger wrote: > > > > Jesse> On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:17:13AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > >> Ok, I'll fix this too. Thanks for looking at it. > > > > Jesse> Does this look better? > > > > Not really. > > > > Jesse> -efi_memmap_walk (efi_freemem_callback_t callback, void *arg) > > Jesse> +efi_memmap_walk (efi_freemem_callback_t callback, void *arg, void *arg2) > > > > Why is this necessary? Why not just pack that extra argument into a > > structure and pass the whole thing to "arg"? > > Duh. But now that I've gone through the exercise, it seems like the > whole callback mechanism is a bit heavyweight (not to mention quite > obtuse). But I guess that's another patch... Now that I look at this, I'm not quite sure what you'd like. Would you like all efi_memmap_walk calls to take a struct args with a function pointer and argument or just filter_rsvd_memory? Or would you like to see it cleaned up in some other way? Thanks, Jesse - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Thu Jul 31 16:29:20 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:16 EST