From: "Joerg Roedel" <joerg.roedel@amd.com>
To: "Oleg Verych" <olecom@flower.upol.cz>
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>,
"Christoph Egger" <Christoph.Egger@amd.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] i386: mce cleanup part1: functional change
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:54:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071009165407.GD13205@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071009163230.GC22435@flower.upol.cz>
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 06:32:30PM +0200, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 06:06:05PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > cpu_has() returns int,
> > > but would it be better to have something like
> > >
> > > if (!mce_disabled &&
> > > !(c->x86_capability & (X86_FEATURE_MCA | X86_FEATURE_MCE)) {
> > > printk(KERN_INFO "CPU%i: No machine check support available\n",
> > > smp_processor_id());
> >
> > This looks complicated and is harder to read. Its exactly the purpose of the
> > cpu_has() macro to avoid such constructs.
>
> It is done via test_bit(), which is designed for IO access with all that
> `const volatile' stuff, 2 x unnecessary, can't be optimized here (IMHO).
This code runs only on bootup and once per cpu. I think readable code
is more important here than make it a few cycles faster.
--
| AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG
Operating | Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany
System | Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896
Research | General Partner authorized to represent:
Center | AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US)
| General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-09 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-09 12:49 [PATCH 0/2] i386: MCE updates Joerg Roedel
2007-10-09 12:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] i386: mce cleanup part1: functional change Joerg Roedel
2007-10-09 16:04 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-09 16:06 ` Joerg Roedel
2007-10-09 16:32 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-09 16:54 ` Joerg Roedel [this message]
2007-10-09 20:46 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-10-10 1:58 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-09 17:33 ` coding for optimizations (Re: [PATCH 1/2] i386: mce cleanup part1: functional change) Oleg Verych
2007-10-09 18:30 ` Joerg Roedel
2007-10-10 23:14 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-10-11 15:26 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-11 15:21 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-10-11 16:13 ` Oleg Verych
2007-10-09 12:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] i386: mce cleanup part2: conding style cleanups Joerg Roedel
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=20071009165407.GD13205@amd.com \
--to=joerg.roedel@amd.com \
--cc=Christoph.Egger@amd.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olecom@flower.upol.cz \
/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