From: "Alex Volkov" <avcp-lkmail@usa.net>
To: "'Andrew Morton'" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"'Jeff Garzik'" <jeff@garzik.org>
Cc: "'Linux Kernel Mailing List'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: aio is unlikely
Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 16:49:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <058f01c7998e$1406e370$650df7cd@MUMBA> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070509151831.f5956b66.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> aio is unlikely
> Stick an unlikely() around is_aio(): I assert that most IO is
synchronous.
>
> -#define in_aio() !is_sync_wait(current->io_wait)
> +#define in_aio() (unlikely(!is_sync_wait(current->io_wait)))
> Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
>
> > > -#define in_aio() !is_sync_wait(current->io_wait)
> > > +#define in_aio() (unlikely(!is_sync_wait(current->io_wait)))
> >
> > Please revert. Workload-dependent "likelihood" should not cause
> > programmers to add such markers.
> a) disagree with the above
>
> b) if in_aio() ever returns true we do
>
> printk(KERN_ERR "%s(%s:%d) called in async context!\n",
> __FUNCTION__, __FILE__, __LINE__);
>
> so I sure hope it's unlikely for all workloads.
Shouldn't unlikely() go where in_aio() is actually used, if we printk(error)
there?
Isn't putting likely/unlikely into a boolean function-like macro itself
asking for later trouble?
--Alex.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-18 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200705092101.l49L1CF1023363@hera.kernel.org>
2007-05-09 22:06 ` aio is unlikely Jeff Garzik
2007-05-09 22:18 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-09 22:37 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-18 20:49 ` Alex Volkov [this message]
2007-05-18 21:06 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-18 21:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-18 21:54 ` Phillip Susi
2007-05-18 22:12 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-18 22:37 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-19 3:43 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-19 3:50 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-18 21:30 ` Bernd Eckenfels
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='058f01c7998e$1406e370$650df7cd@MUMBA' \
--to=avcp-lkmail@usa.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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