From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 08:13:05 +0200 Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] [PATCH v2] blkdev: Replace blksize_bits() with ilog2() In-Reply-To: <20200602055152.GA11620@lst.de> References: <20200529141100.37519-1-pilgrimtao@gmail.com> <20200601084426.GB1667318@kroah.com> <20200602055152.GA11620@lst.de> Message-ID: <20200602061305.GA2258861@kroah.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Tao pilgrim , Jens Axboe , sth@linux.ibm.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, clm@fb.com, jaegeuk@kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, Mark Fasheh , dhowells@redhat.com, balbi@kernel.org, damien.lemoal@wdc.com, bvanassche@acm.org, ming.lei@redhat.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com, satyat@google.com, chaitanya.kulkarni@wdc.com, houtao1@huawei.com, asml.silence@gmail.com, ajay.joshi@wdc.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Muchun Song , hoeppner@linux.ibm.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, sagi@grimberg.me, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Josef Bacik , dsterba@suse.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, chao@kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, darrick.wong@oracle.com, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jlbec@evilplan.org, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, deepa.kernel@gmail.com On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 07:51:52AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 10:44:26AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > But does this code path actually show up anywhere that is actually > > measurable as mattering? > > > > If so, please show that benchmark results. > > I think the requests are starting to be a bit unreasonable. Tao is > replacing a reimplementation of a standard function with that standard > function / compiler builtin. We don't put such a high burden on that. That's fine, but to say it is "faster" usually means we want to see it actually going faster somehow :) > And once the proper existing fields are used where possible as shown > in my reply just replacing the rest seems totally obvious - quite > contrary I think keeping a reimplementation would need a high bar. Your patch makes sense, I was not objecting to that. thanks, greg k-h