From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752117AbdGACsV (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:48:21 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0239.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.239]:33654 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751581AbdGACsU (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:48:20 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::,RULES_HIT:41:69:355:379:541:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1373:1431:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1539:1567:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3865:3866:3867:3870:3871:4321:5007:7264:7514:8660:10004:10400:10848:11026:11658:11783:11914:12043:12262:12438:12679:12683:12740:12895:13069:13148:13161:13229:13230:13311:13357:13439:13894:14110:14181:14659:14721:21080:21365:21451:21611:21627:30054:30070:30079:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: screw82_2b804f53eb61b X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1270 Message-ID: <1498877297.2353.10.camel@perches.com> Subject: seq_file optimization? From: Joe Perches To: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 19:48:17 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6-1ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org About this commit in mm: --------------------------------------------------- commit c1aca87fb3f84a813fb3dda656bbee583c9c87a3 Author: Alexey Dobriyan Date:   Fri Jun 30 11:02:04 2017 +1000     fs/seq_file.c: delete small-value optimization          num_to_str() optimizes printing small integers [0..9], so the same check     higher in callchain is unnecessary. --------------------------------------------------- Is removing this optimization really the same speed? I don't think so. The num_to_str call still does multiple moves of memory to the output, this is a single byte copy.