Messages in this thread | | | From | Nikola Pajkovsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] md: Fine-tuning for some function implementations | Date | Wed, 03 May 2017 09:38:02 +0200 |
| |
NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 02 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> >> Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 16:12:34 +0200 >> >> Some update suggestions were taken into account >> from static source code analysis. >> >> Markus Elfring (6): >> Replace seven seq_printf() calls by seq_putc() >> Replace 17 seq_printf() calls by seq_puts() > > Why does anyone care whether printf or putc/puts is used? Really it > doesn't matter *at* *all*.
It could matter, but this patchset does not state it all. Does not have any perf tests and so on.
f7a5f132b447 ("proc: faster /proc/*/status") 68ba0326b4e1 ("proc: much faster /proc/vmstat")
> I don't object to the patch but if it would up to me I probably wouldn't > bother applying it it either. > Sometimes I just want to "print" something and I don't want to care > whether it is a constant string or a single-byte constant string, or > something more general. > I see these changes as worse than white-space fixes. > > NeilBrown > > >> Adjust four function calls together with a variable assignment >> Use seq_puts() in faulty_status() >> Adjust six function calls together with a variable assignment in faulty_status() >> Add some spaces for better code readability >> >> drivers/md/faulty.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- >> drivers/md/md.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ >> 2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 2.12.2
-- Nikola
| |