All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_show()
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 12:37:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161017123726.GE29095@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a09542e6-9851-45ef-583d-338205217cfc@users.sourceforge.net>

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:30:59PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Some data were printed into a sequence by six separate function calls.
> >> Print the same data by a single function call instead.
> > 
> > ... why?
> > 
> > Beyond simply having fewer function calls, is there an upside?
> 
> Will it matter to improve run time characteristics at this source code
> place?

I do not know. If that's not the aim of your existing patch, then I have
no idea what you're trying to achieve.

> > This makes it harder to see the relationship between the format strings
> > and their associated data, and makes the code longer.
> 
> Do you prefer an other layout for the passed data so that the increase
> of line count in my update suggestion would look differently?

I prefer the code as-is. Unless there's a compelling reason to change
it.

Thanks,
Mark.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_show()
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:37:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161017123726.GE29095@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a09542e6-9851-45ef-583d-338205217cfc@users.sourceforge.net>

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:30:59PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Some data were printed into a sequence by six separate function calls.
> >> Print the same data by a single function call instead.
> > 
> > ... why?
> > 
> > Beyond simply having fewer function calls, is there an upside?
> 
> Will it matter to improve run time characteristics at this source code
> place?

I do not know. If that's not the aim of your existing patch, then I have
no idea what you're trying to achieve.

> > This makes it harder to see the relationship between the format strings
> > and their associated data, and makes the code longer.
> 
> Do you prefer an other layout for the passed data so that the increase
> of line count in my update suggestion would look differently?

I prefer the code as-is. Unless there's a compelling reason to change
it.

Thanks,
Mark.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Subject: Re: ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_show()
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:37:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161017123726.GE29095@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a09542e6-9851-45ef-583d-338205217cfc@users.sourceforge.net>

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:30:59PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Some data were printed into a sequence by six separate function calls.
> >> Print the same data by a single function call instead.
> > 
> > ... why?
> > 
> > Beyond simply having fewer function calls, is there an upside?
> 
> Will it matter to improve run time characteristics at this source code
> place?

I do not know. If that's not the aim of your existing patch, then I have
no idea what you're trying to achieve.

> > This makes it harder to see the relationship between the format strings
> > and their associated data, and makes the code longer.
> 
> Do you prefer an other layout for the passed data so that the increase
> of line count in my update suggestion would look differently?

I prefer the code as-is. Unless there's a compelling reason to change
it.

Thanks,
Mark.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-17 12:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-16 19:03 [PATCH] ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_show() SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-16 19:03 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-16 19:03 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17  9:37 ` [PATCH] ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_sho Matthias Brugger
2016-10-17  9:37   ` [PATCH] ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_show() Matthias Brugger
2016-10-17  9:37   ` Matthias Brugger
2016-10-17 10:56 ` [PATCH] ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_sho Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 10:56   ` [PATCH] ARM64-cpuinfo: Combine six calls for sequence output into one seq_printf() call in c_show() Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 10:56   ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 11:30   ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17 11:30     ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17 11:30     ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17 12:37     ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2016-10-17 12:37       ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 12:37       ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 12:50       ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17 12:50         ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17 12:50         ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-17 13:10         ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 13:10           ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 13:10           ` Mark Rutland

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=20161017123726.GE29095@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.