public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: BUGed to death
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:55:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <92940000.1050353740@flay> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030414210006.GA7831@suse.de>

>  > Seems all these bug checks are fairly expensive. I can get 1%
>  > back on system time for kernel compiles by changing BUG to 
>  > "do {} while (0)" to make them all compile away. Profiles aren't
>  > very revealing though ... seems to be within experimental error ;-(
>  > 
>  > I was pondering CONFIG_RUN_WILD_NAKED_AND_FREE
> 
> The sort of folks who would worry about that very last 1% are the
> sort of people that would more than likely hit these BUGs as they're
> really stressing things.
> 
> Losing a bunch of potential reports (and possibly doing bad things),
> in the name of a 1% performance boost doesn't sound too productive to me.

True - however I should have included some more info ... Andrew worked
out that some of the hottest ones lead to a null ptr dereference
immediately afterwards anyways, so they're actually pointless.

I wasn't seriously suggesting just removing all of them, was just a point
of interest for some things that would be worth looking at ;-)

I'd agree with you that an unreliable system is 100% slower than a working
one ;-)

M.

  reply	other threads:[~2003-04-14 20:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-04-14 20:19 BUGed to death Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-14 20:40 ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-14 21:02   ` Dave Jones
2003-04-14 21:10     ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-14 21:17       ` Dave Jones
2003-04-15 11:57         ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-15 12:05           ` Dave Jones
2003-04-15 14:39             ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-23 15:08             ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-14 21:00 ` Dave Jones
2003-04-14 20:55   ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2003-04-14 21:08     ` Dave Jones
2003-04-14 21:50       ` Andrew Morton
2003-04-14 21:55         ` Dave Jones
2003-04-15  0:23   ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-15 12:01 ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-15 12:31   ` Jens Axboe
2003-04-15 12:36     ` Dave Jones
2003-04-15 12:40       ` Jens Axboe
2003-04-15 12:49     ` Sean Neakums
2003-04-15 12:52       ` Sean Neakums
2003-04-15 13:01     ` Roman Zippel
2003-04-15 13:17       ` Jens Axboe
2003-04-15 13:55     ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-15 14:22       ` Jens Axboe
2003-04-15 14:35   ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-15 14:39     ` Duncan Sands
2003-04-15 14:45       ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-15 14:58         ` Duncan Sands
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-15 14:30 rwhron
2003-04-15 15:57 ` Dave Jones
2003-04-15 16:11   ` Nick Piggin
2003-04-15 16:42   ` Michael Buesch
2003-04-15 16:45     ` Dave Jones
2003-04-15 18:33 Chuck Ebbert

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=92940000.1050353740@flay \
    --to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
    --cc=akpm@digeo.com \
    --cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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