From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932215AbWFDJHt (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:07:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932217AbWFDJHt (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:07:49 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:8385 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932215AbWFDJHt (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 05:07:49 -0400 Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 02:07:38 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Fengguang Wu Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, diegocg@gmail.com, lista1@comhem.se, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] readahead: initial method - expected read size - fix fastcall Message-Id: <20060604020738.31f43cb0.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <349406446.10828@ustc.edu.cn> References: <349406446.10828@ustc.edu.cn> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 4 Jun 2006 15:34:15 +0800 Fengguang Wu wrote: > Remove 'fastcall' directive for function readahead_close(). > > It has drawn concerns from Andrew Morton. Well. I think fastcall is ugly and vaguely silly. Now if we has a really_really_fastcall then I'd like to use that! > Now I have some benchmarks > on it, and proved it as a _false_ optimization. Sorry, I don't believe this will be measurable (and with CONFIG_REGPARM it'll be a no-op). But I'm always glad to see a fastcall disappear ;)