From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>,
johnstul@us.ibm.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: + clocksource-driver-initialize-list-value.patch added to -mm tree
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:47:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1175723252.28263.359.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070404134812.0c23c5af.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, 2007-04-04 at 13:48 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2007 22:36:47 +0200
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> >
> > * Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The struct clocksource .list field is now required to be initialized
> > > before calling clocksource_register().
> > >
> > > This is a prerequisite for simplifying the clocksource registration
> > > process.
> >
> > why?
>
> It's all enablement for
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm4/broken-out/clocksource-refactor-duplicate-registration-checking.patch,
> on which I have no opinion.
I have. Just noticed that my original comment got stuck in mail jam:
> Refactors the duplicate registration checking. This makes it based on the
> clocksource structure list state. I was able to drop some if statements
> making the registration code path slightly smaller and faster, and remove
> some looping which was endemic of the first version of this check.
What does the slightly smaller and faster buy us ?
Which looping has been removed ? If you want to optimize this code then
you need to break out of the loop, once the rating check has found the
place to stick it in.
But I still do not see any advantage in this. Registration is a one time
operation and not near any fast path.
tglx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-04 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200704010523.l315NXJP004063@shell0.pdx.osdl.net>
2007-04-01 8:43 ` + clocksource-driver-initialize-list-value.patch added to -mm tree Thomas Gleixner
2007-04-04 16:38 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-04 19:58 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-04 20:10 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-04 20:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-04 20:44 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-04 21:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-04 21:30 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-04 21:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-04 21:59 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-04 23:48 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-05 0:00 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-05 0:20 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-04-05 0:34 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-05 6:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-04-05 7:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-05 11:35 ` Daniel Walker
2007-04-04 20:48 ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-04 21:47 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
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=1175723252.28263.359.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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