Messages in this thread | | | From | Oliver Neukum <> | Subject | Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*? | Date | Sun, 12 Jan 2003 23:06:14 +0100 |
| |
> I've only compiled (and haven't tested this code), but it should be much > faster than the original code. Why? Because we're eliminating an extra > "jump" in several places in the code every time open would be called. > Yes, it's more code, so the kernel is a little bigger, but it should be > faster at the same time, and memory should be less of an issue nowadays. > > Here's the patch if you want to apply it (i have only compile tested it, > I haven't booted with it).. This patch applied to the 2.5.56 kernel. > > --- open.c.orig 2003-01-12 16:17:01.000000000 -0500 > +++ open.c 2003-01-12 16:22:32.000000000 -0500 > @@ -100,44 +100,58 @@ > > error = -EINVAL; > if (length < 0) /* sorry, but loff_t says... */ > - goto out; > + return error;
Please don't do such things. The next time locking is changed and a lock is needed here, some poor guy has to go through that and change all back to goto. This may not be applicable here, but as a general rule, don't do it. I speak from experience.
As for efficiency, that is the compiler's job.
Regards Oliver
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |