Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: MD-RAID: Use seq_putc() in three status functions? | From | Hannes Reinecke <> | Date | Mon, 17 Oct 2016 19:18:35 +0200 |
| |
On 10/17/2016 06:08 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote: >>> * Would you really like to know under which circumstances data processing >>> will be faster for a single character instead of using a string pointer >>> and corresponding two characters? >>> >> It's not a problem of the interface, it's a problem of the resulting code >> (ie assembler output). > > How do you think about to discuss concrete generated code any further? > Sure. Show me the generated code and point out where the benefits are.
>> We can discuss all we like, if the compiler decides to throw in >> an optimisation none of the arguments even apply. > > Would it make sense to clarify assembler output with optimisation switched off? > > Do you eventually care for code from non-optimising compilers? > No. This is the linux kernel. There is a very, _very_ limited benefit of trying to use a non-standard compiler.
> >>> * Will it occasionally be useful to avoid the storage for another string literal? >>> >> Occasionally: yes. >> In this particular case: hardly. > > I am curious when such a software design aspect can become more relevant. > Would it be nice to get rid of three questionable string terminators (null bytes) > for example? > Again, all this does it trying to out-guess what the compiler might be doing during compilation. For which the easiest method is checking. So back to the original task for you: Show me in the generated output where the benefits are.
Cheers,
Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke zSeries & Storage hare@suse.de +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: J. Hawn, J. Guild, F. Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
| |