From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nikola Pajkovsky Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 07:38:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] md: Fine-tuning for some function implementations Message-Id: <87pofq75lx.fsf@suse.cz> List-Id: References: <87efw7q6tm.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> In-Reply-To: <87efw7q6tm.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: NeilBrown Cc: SF Markus Elfring , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, Shaohua Li , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org NeilBrown writes: > On Tue, May 02 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> From: Markus Elfring >> Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 16:12:34 +0200 >> >> Some update suggestions were taken into account >> from static source code analysis. >> >> Markus Elfring (6): >> Replace seven seq_printf() calls by seq_putc() >> Replace 17 seq_printf() calls by seq_puts() > > Why does anyone care whether printf or putc/puts is used? Really it > doesn't matter *at* *all*. It could matter, but this patchset does not state it all. Does not have any perf tests and so on. f7a5f132b447 ("proc: faster /proc/*/status") 68ba0326b4e1 ("proc: much faster /proc/vmstat") > I don't object to the patch but if it would up to me I probably wouldn't > bother applying it it either. > Sometimes I just want to "print" something and I don't want to care > whether it is a constant string or a single-byte constant string, or > something more general. > I see these changes as worse than white-space fixes. > > NeilBrown > > >> Adjust four function calls together with a variable assignment >> Use seq_puts() in faulty_status() >> Adjust six function calls together with a variable assignment in faulty_status() >> Add some spaces for better code readability >> >> drivers/md/faulty.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- >> drivers/md/md.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ >> 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 2.12.2 -- Nikola