lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Cleanup clearing of BDI_pending bit in bdi_forker_thread()
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 06:06:12PM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Sun 04-09-11 12:13:05, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 11:04:42AM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 03, 2011 at 06:54:18AM +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > > bdi_forker_thread() clears BDI_pending bit at the end of the main loop.
> > > > However clearing of this bit must not be done in some cases which is handled by
> > > > calling 'continue' from switch statement. That's kind of unusual construct and
> > > > without a good reason so change the function into more intuitive code flow.
> > > >
> > > > CC: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> > > > CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> > >
> > > It's pure code refactor.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> >
> > But I do suspect it will slightly increase the code size.
> > What do you think?
> I haven't checked, maybe it will if the compiler is not clever enough to
> merge two occurences of the function which is going to be inlined. But the
> overhead will be really small and the code is not really performance critical
> so I think clarity has priority.

I have no problem then. It's not a big matter.

Thanks,
Fengguang


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-05 14:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans