public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: nscott@aconex.com
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] XFS bitops to Linux again
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 10:14:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200710041014.22936.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60338.192.168.3.1.1191452291.squirrel@mail.aconex.com>


> Several of these call sites are also compiled in userspace in libxfs.  It
> would
> be a good idea from that POV also to keep some level of abstraction so that
> these calls can be mapped to userspace routines as well.

Again the same argument applies -- there is no difference if you
map xfs_(high|low)bit or fls64/fls/find_find_bit() to something else.

> > The resulting xfs.ko is about 500 bytes smaller on x86-64
>
> Thats it?  

It's probably a little faster too (admittedly unlikely to be really 
measurable in a macro benchmark) and the source code is smaller.

> What testing was done?  Changes to some of these routines has introuced
> subtle log recovery bugs in the past - has recovery been tested at all?
> The QA
> suite has some log recovery tests, it'd be a good idea to verify with
> those..

I had a simple separate unit test to verify the 32bit space gave the same 
result. The only difference was the 0 case, but I checked all inputs
manually. Usually they had != 0 tests already or zero was impossible;
 in the few cases were not I added ASSERTs -- so if i got it wrong it should 
bomb out quickly.

I did also some simple tests using the QA suite -- i believe a few logs 
were recovered -- but not the full tests. 

> To be honest, this sounds like just code churn and risk 
> introduction.

Ok I got the message. I retract the patch. Sorry for bothering you
with lowly cleanups.

-Andi

  reply	other threads:[~2007-10-04  8:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-03 22:27 [PATCH] XFS bitops to Linux again Andi Kleen
2007-10-03 22:58 ` nscott
2007-10-04  8:14   ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-10-04 13:11     ` Eric Sandeen
2007-10-04 20:42     ` nscott
2007-10-04 21:10       ` Eric Sandeen
2007-10-04 23:08     ` David Chinner

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=200710041014.22936.ak@suse.de \
    --to=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=nscott@aconex.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox