From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Toshi Kani Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ACPI: Add acpi_pr_() interfaces Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 17:43:57 -0600 Message-ID: <1342741437.3010.275.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> References: <1342644027-19559-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <1342644027-19559-2-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <1342648771.5138.37.camel@lorien2> <1342650386.3010.55.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <1342651257.5138.44.camel@lorien2> <1342651966.3010.66.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <1342653482.5138.56.camel@lorien2> <1342658296.3010.136.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <1342714515.3100.27.camel@lorien2> <1342718897.3010.188.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <1342725950.5599.7.camel@lorien2> <1342731093.3010.245.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <1342737168.6809.40.camel@lorien2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from g4t0017.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.20]:46264 "EHLO g4t0017.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751580Ab2GSXsn (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2012 19:48:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1342737168.6809.40.camel@lorien2> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: shuah.khan@hp.com Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, liuj97@gmail.com, srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com, prarit@redhat.com, imammedo@redhat.com, vijaymohan.pandarathil@hp.com, shuahkhan@gmail.com On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:32 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 14:51 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > > If your concern is actually a performance bottleneck in acpi_get_name() > > you found in the code, you should report it to the ACPI CA team. > > I have tried my best to get you to understand the problems in bigger > picture your patch set can exacerbate. Looking to somebody else to fix > the problems doesn't help. It doesn't look like we can come to an > agreement here, we just have to agree to disagree. I am not asking someone to fix it. I tried my best to explain that acpi_get_name() does not lead any performance issue when it is called in the error paths of ACPI drivers, and why we have to call it to obtain an object path info for error analysis. If you still believe there is a performance issue in calling acpi_get_name() under this context, please help us understand where the performance bottleneck is in the code. (I hope you just concerned it because it has "acpi_" prefix...) I will then work on the issue with the ACPI CA team. Thanks, -Toshi > caio, > -- Shuah >