public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	LM Sensors <lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6] (10/11) hwmon vs i2c, second round
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 23:02:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050731230259.05625a4e.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050731205650.GA3963@mipter.zuzino.mipt.ru>

Hi Alexey,

> > I see very little reason why vid_from_reg and vid_to_reg are
> > inlined. The former is not exactly short,
> 
> 1)
> 				   and their arguments aren't known at
> compile time,
> 
> [Compiler can optimise them away _completely_ if both arguments are
> known at compile time or significantly of only one is known.]

Good point, I'll try to remember that. It doesn't apply here though
except for lm78 I think, and maybe lm93 when it gets ported. That's not
the majority of users though, so I still believe uninlining is the
correct decision.

> > and they are never called in speed critical areas. Uninlining them
> > should cause little performance loss if any, and saves a signficant
> > space and compilation time as well.
> 
> 2) VID_FROM_REG is asking for removal from lm85.

True, I wrote a patch doing this already:
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2005-July/013148.html

Just wait for Greg to pick it and it'll show in -mm.

> 3) vid_to_reg is used only by atxp1.

That's right. Do you suggest that it should be kept inlined then?
Similar drivers may be written in the future, causing vid_to_reg to gain
users and possibly grow larger (to support more VRM/VRD standards), then
we'll certainly want to uninline it anyway - but I agree that this ain't
the case at the moment.

I'll change that patch to only uninline vid_from_reg and not vid_to_reg
if a majority prefers me to do so.

Thanks for your comments :)
-- 
Jean Delvare

  reply	other threads:[~2005-07-31 21:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-07-31 18:59 [PATCH 2.6] (0/11) hwmon vs i2c, second round Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:20 ` [PATCH 2.6] (1/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:33 ` [PATCH 2.6] (2/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:36 ` [PATCH 2.6] (3/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:42 ` [PATCH 2.6] (4/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:45 ` [PATCH 2.6] (5/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:49 ` [PATCH 2.6] (6/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:52 ` [PATCH 2.6] (7/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:54 ` [PATCH 2.6] (8/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 19:57 ` [PATCH 2.6] (9/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 20:02 ` [PATCH 2.6] (10/11) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 20:56   ` Alexey Dobriyan
2005-07-31 21:02     ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2005-08-01 20:50   ` [PATCH 2.6] (10/11, revised) " Jean Delvare
2005-07-31 20:12 ` [PATCH 2.6] (11/11) " Jean Delvare

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=20050731230259.05625a4e.khali@linux-fr.org \
    --to=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.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