All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: fix used_mask init in validate_group()
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 15:40:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150409144029.GE9648@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1428589600.20354.27.camel@deneb.redhat.com>

> > > > >  validate_group(struct perf_event *event)
> > > > >  {
> > > > >  	struct perf_event *sibling, *leader = event->group_leader;
> > > > > -	struct cci_pmu_hw_events fake_pmu = {
> > > > > -		/*
> > > > > -		 * Initialise the fake PMU. We only need to populate the
> > > > > -		 * used_mask for the purposes of validation.
> > > > > -		 */
> > > > > -		.used_mask = CPU_BITS_NONE,
> > > > 
> > > > Can we not simply change this to:
> > > > 
> > > > 		.used_mask = { 0 },
> > > > 
> > > > That should result in the entire array being zeroed.
> > > 
> > > It does, but it also causes the whole struct to be cleared.
> > 
> > Sure, but it's also the minimal diff, and it's easier to read. This was
> > what the code was intended to be initially.
> > 
> > > With the memset, only used_mask gets cleared.
> > 
> > Is there an appreciable difference between the two performance-wise?
> 
> I dunno. It is 3 strp insns vs 1 str.
> If you want the static init, I'll send another patch.

I'd prefer the designated initializer to the memset.

Thanks,
Mark.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: CCI: fix used_mask init in validate_group()
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 15:40:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150409144029.GE9648@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1428589600.20354.27.camel@deneb.redhat.com>

> > > > >  validate_group(struct perf_event *event)
> > > > >  {
> > > > >  	struct perf_event *sibling, *leader = event->group_leader;
> > > > > -	struct cci_pmu_hw_events fake_pmu = {
> > > > > -		/*
> > > > > -		 * Initialise the fake PMU. We only need to populate the
> > > > > -		 * used_mask for the purposes of validation.
> > > > > -		 */
> > > > > -		.used_mask = CPU_BITS_NONE,
> > > > 
> > > > Can we not simply change this to:
> > > > 
> > > > 		.used_mask = { 0 },
> > > > 
> > > > That should result in the entire array being zeroed.
> > > 
> > > It does, but it also causes the whole struct to be cleared.
> > 
> > Sure, but it's also the minimal diff, and it's easier to read. This was
> > what the code was intended to be initially.
> > 
> > > With the memset, only used_mask gets cleared.
> > 
> > Is there an appreciable difference between the two performance-wise?
> 
> I dunno. It is 3 strp insns vs 1 str.
> If you want the static init, I'll send another patch.

I'd prefer the designated initializer to the memset.

Thanks,
Mark.

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-09 14:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-08 18:21 [PATCH] drivers: CCI: fix used_mask init in validate_group() Mark Salter
2015-04-08 18:21 ` Mark Salter
2015-04-09 11:06 ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-09 11:06   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-09 13:51 ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-09 13:51   ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-09 14:11   ` Mark Salter
2015-04-09 14:11     ` Mark Salter
2015-04-09 14:20     ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-09 14:20       ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-09 14:26       ` Mark Salter
2015-04-09 14:26         ` Mark Salter
2015-04-09 14:40         ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2015-04-09 14:40           ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-09 14:57           ` [PATCH V2] " Mark Salter
2015-04-09 14:57             ` Mark Salter
2015-04-09 15:36             ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-09 15:36               ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-13 12:41               ` Will Deacon
2015-04-13 12:41                 ` Will Deacon
2015-04-30 10:55                 ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-30 10:55                   ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-30 13:26                   ` Mark Salter
2015-04-30 13:26                     ` Mark Salter
2015-04-30 13:33                     ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-30 13:33                       ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-30 14:03                       ` Mark Salter
2015-04-30 14:03                         ` Mark Salter
2015-04-30 14:38                         ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-30 14:38                           ` Mark Rutland
2015-04-30 14:46                           ` Mark Salter
2015-04-30 14:46                             ` Mark Salter
2015-04-30 14:52                             ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-30 14:52                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-15 10:44             ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-15 10:44               ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-15 11:58               ` Will Deacon
2015-04-15 11:58                 ` Will Deacon
2015-04-15 12:50                 ` Suzuki K. Poulose
2015-04-15 12:50                   ` Suzuki K. Poulose

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150409144029.GE9648@leverpostej \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.