From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2018 07:25:30 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Joakim Tjernlund Cc: "danielwa@cisco.com" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "nkela@cisco.com" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "xe-linux-external@cisco.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH] jffs2: implement mount option to configure endianness Message-ID: <20181108152530.GA27198@infradead.org> References: <20181106214928.40020-1-nkela@cisco.com> <921b0f78cf67d7307a0555e1fd6f2c2976310adc.camel@infradead.org> <1e4c066d1896e2a0b8b146253d34d05cc4f9ab36.camel@infinera.com> <8b08e8b992093453bb2b9caff8cff08c.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org> <20181107173303.slnb3i2d6ufaonp7@zorba> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 06:41:47PM +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > Certainly not. I'm not sure which architectures do have Spectre V2 > > mitigations which make indirect branches expensive now... perhaps there is > > no intersection with the cases where we really care about JFFS2 being > > CPU-bound? > > All that passing of a new extra arg and extra if .. elif .. does cost too. I know of no current microarchitecture where an indirect call is cheaper than a simple branch, which can be very well predicted.