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
next prev parent 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