Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 3 Jul 2017 08:19:37 +0200 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] staging: sm750fb: skip unnecessary comparisons |
| |
On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 09:26:47AM +0800, Lynn Lei wrote: > introduced early checks to skip unnecessary comparisons when flags set.
Why?
> > Signed-off-by: Lynn Lei <lynnl.wit@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 11 ++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > index 386d4adcd91d..9e57a2d32465 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > @@ -1171,11 +1171,16 @@ static int __init lynxfb_setup(char *options) > */ > while ((opt = strsep(&options, ":")) != NULL) { > /* options that mean for any lynx chips are configured here */ > - if (!strncmp(opt, "noaccel", strlen("noaccel"))) { > + > + /* > + * NOTE: the length of options is hard-coded > + * if any of those options changed please update its length > + */
That's not good, why require this? What is wrong with the original code here? It doesn't have that type of restriction, right?
> + if (!g_noaccel && !strncmp(opt, "noaccel", 7)) { > g_noaccel = 1; > - } else if (!strncmp(opt, "nomtrr", strlen("nomtrr"))) { > + } else if (!g_nomtrr && !strncmp(opt, "nomtrr", 6)) {
I don't see the benefit of this change at all, what am I missing?
thanks,
greg k-h
| |