From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDS: Simplify code
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2016 05:14:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160905051422.GT21847@leon.nu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73fc4be8-2530-b9ab-945b-887db6dca2a6@wanadoo.fr>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2234 bytes --]
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 06:38:21AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 04/09/2016 à 20:23, Leon Romanovsky a écrit :
> >On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 05:57:20PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> >>Le 04/09/2016 à 14:20, Leon Romanovsky a écrit :
> >>>On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 07:33:29AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> >>>>Calling 'list_splice' followed by 'INIT_LIST_HEAD' is equivalent to
> >>>>'list_splice_init'.
> >>>It is not 100% accurate
> >>>
> >>>list_splice(y, z)
> >>>INIT_LIST_HEAD(y)
> >>>
> >>>==>
> >>>
> >>>if (!list_empty(y))
> >>> __list_splice(y, z, z>next);
> >>>INIT_LIST_HEAD(y)
> >>>
> >>>and not
> >>>
> >>>if (!list_empty(y)) {
> >>> __list_splice(y, z, z>next);
> >>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(y)
> >>>}
> >>>
> >>>as list_splice_init will do.
> >>>
> >>You are right but if you dig further you will see that calling
> >>INIT_LIST_HEAD on an empty list is a no-op (AFAIK).
> >>And if this list was not already correctly initialized, then you would have
> >>some other troubles.
> >Thank you for the suggestion,
> >It looks like the code after that can be skipped in case of loop_conns
> >list is empty, the tmp_list will be empty too.
> >
> >174 list_for_each_entry_safe(lc, _lc, &tmp_list, loop_node) {
> >175 WARN_ON(lc->conn->c_passive);
> >176 rds_conn_destroy(lc->conn);
> >177 }
> Yes, but this would require some more code and test. This function doesn't
> seem to be in a hot path, so I'm not sure that the added complexity would
> worth it.
> It would require a new 'list_empty()' test and some code rearrangement.
>
> I suppose that testing for emptiness at the beginning or going through a
> list_for_each_entry_safe on a empty list (which will exit immediately and do
> nothing) is more or less the same in term of speed. So keep the code simple
> and readable.
I would expect one list_empty check at the beginning and return
immediately, but anyway it doesn't matter.
>
> CJ
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDS: Simplify code
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 08:14:22 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160905051422.GT21847@leon.nu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <73fc4be8-2530-b9ab-945b-887db6dca2a6@wanadoo.fr>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2234 bytes --]
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 06:38:21AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Le 04/09/2016 à 20:23, Leon Romanovsky a écrit :
> >On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 05:57:20PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> >>Le 04/09/2016 à 14:20, Leon Romanovsky a écrit :
> >>>On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 07:33:29AM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> >>>>Calling 'list_splice' followed by 'INIT_LIST_HEAD' is equivalent to
> >>>>'list_splice_init'.
> >>>It is not 100% accurate
> >>>
> >>>list_splice(y, z)
> >>>INIT_LIST_HEAD(y)
> >>>
> >>>==>
> >>>
> >>>if (!list_empty(y))
> >>> __list_splice(y, z, z>next);
> >>>INIT_LIST_HEAD(y)
> >>>
> >>>and not
> >>>
> >>>if (!list_empty(y)) {
> >>> __list_splice(y, z, z>next);
> >>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(y)
> >>>}
> >>>
> >>>as list_splice_init will do.
> >>>
> >>You are right but if you dig further you will see that calling
> >>INIT_LIST_HEAD on an empty list is a no-op (AFAIK).
> >>And if this list was not already correctly initialized, then you would have
> >>some other troubles.
> >Thank you for the suggestion,
> >It looks like the code after that can be skipped in case of loop_conns
> >list is empty, the tmp_list will be empty too.
> >
> >174 list_for_each_entry_safe(lc, _lc, &tmp_list, loop_node) {
> >175 WARN_ON(lc->conn->c_passive);
> >176 rds_conn_destroy(lc->conn);
> >177 }
> Yes, but this would require some more code and test. This function doesn't
> seem to be in a hot path, so I'm not sure that the added complexity would
> worth it.
> It would require a new 'list_empty()' test and some code rearrangement.
>
> I suppose that testing for emptiness at the beginning or going through a
> list_for_each_entry_safe on a empty list (which will exit immediately and do
> nothing) is more or less the same in term of speed. So keep the code simple
> and readable.
I would expect one list_empty check at the beginning and return
immediately, but anyway it doesn't matter.
>
> CJ
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-05 5:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-03 5:33 [PATCH] RDS: Simplify code Christophe JAILLET
2016-09-03 5:33 ` Christophe JAILLET
2016-09-03 5:33 ` Christophe JAILLET
2016-09-04 12:20 ` Leon Romanovsky
2016-09-04 12:20 ` Leon Romanovsky
2016-09-04 15:57 ` Christophe JAILLET
2016-09-04 15:57 ` Christophe JAILLET
[not found] ` <befa1a39-cfc5-721f-e39a-369436237b1c-39ZsbGIQGT5GWvitb5QawA@public.gmane.org>
2016-09-04 18:23 ` Leon Romanovsky
2016-09-04 18:23 ` Leon Romanovsky
2016-09-04 18:23 ` Leon Romanovsky
[not found] ` <20160904182354.GR21847-2ukJVAZIZ/Y@public.gmane.org>
2016-09-05 4:38 ` Christophe JAILLET
2016-09-05 5:14 ` Leon Romanovsky [this message]
2016-09-05 5:14 ` Leon Romanovsky
2016-09-06 0:22 ` santosh.shilimkar
2016-09-06 0:22 ` santosh.shilimkar
2016-09-06 0:22 ` santosh.shilimkar-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA
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=20160905051422.GT21847@leon.nu \
--to=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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.