From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752187AbbJOIsb (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 15 Oct 2015 04:48:31 -0400
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:41662 "EHLO
	aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751882AbbJOIs2 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 15 Oct 2015 04:48:28 -0400
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 11:48:12 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Marc Dietrich <marvin24@gmx.de>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
        Sakshi Bansal <sakshi.april5@gmail.com>, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: nvec: fixed few coding style warnings
Message-ID: <20151015084812.GP7289@mwanda>
References: <20151014140822.GA23114@localhost.localdomain>
 <20151014181236.GX7340@mwanda>
 <1971511.Ec7FdKlGRN@fb07-iapwap2>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1971511.Ec7FdKlGRN@fb07-iapwap2>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:39:02AM +0200, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> > > -			if (unlikely(nvec->rx == NULL)) {
> > > +			if (!unlikely(nvec->rx)) {
> > 
> > This isn't right.  You intented to say:
> > 
> > 	if (unlikely(!nvec->rx)) {
> > 
> > But even better to just remove the unlikely entirely.
> > 
> > 	if (!nvec->rx) {
> 
> why? the "unlikely" is there to optimize a critical interrupt path.

The rule is that drivers should not use likely/unlikely() unless there
is a difference in benchmark numbers.  How critical can it be when it's
always followed by a udelay(100)???

There are more important optimizations needed here.

regards,
dan carpenter