From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752137AbdEIIpD (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 May 2017 04:45:03 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:52858 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751510AbdEIIpB (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 May 2017 04:45:01 -0400 Subject: Re: S390: Fine-tuning for six function implementations To: Vegard Nossum , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_Borntr=c3=a4ger?= , Heiko Carstens , Ingo Molnar , Martin Schwidefsky , Paul Gortmaker , Peter Oberparleiter , Peter Zijlstra , Sascha Silbe , Viktor Mihajlovski , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org References: <51ba03f7-d1d8-8064-7dee-b5a910ad47de@oracle.com> From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <4fd54bfb-d681-ae6f-d92c-795a6bc67a80@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 10:43:56 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <51ba03f7-d1d8-8064-7dee-b5a910ad47de@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:dVO8Sf/Rkd4rh850x+CCUZAwtycNrR696DM6xRnq85sHMr1WMJW yijJIXRyQoUGdVUU4gZFGOAOKSFvGc7bf6vakI6Qf/oqnASLw0ZgCSQYBQX1syET3K8z3Ew xd5wxtXcvXiriqNvhEUKk23zigRRfGfbrr5701JNYnUJ3XGC0ERDiuRDC/LUXXIT+E/gUnS xokXfJ0qA3OyuQI2ZFYIw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:r/vbUJWXE/Q=:lY2ze/e/YyxDja0XU4+PpO raSwvph3d3tS3ggX1zjz7mhaLF+UxGu1VuE85fBgqvv9EDMWe3IOojn6Yl/+mTUD0vcOvXJye b/AwHsN4NL+URcf9QLu+sr21fygSODsT0uqzwiUY4bB8Pi2Y/K9y+1fFntWUXBaxHSvbbOVK2 aTXFn7LNYKeZid7d9QSvmyTpJc9yeDflU7dcoXrulRAo0ZvuAB2aNzG7UhGtvAGLbQ6/7pGG+ wJ7X8eZAs3H213UxfPiA9H+mAloRuhtUe9euSt3cigbTQdsXRvZNoayTnE5+h4cMqC9VAXmcx 4AA+eIGkLwuZ3FfIrVDpm8JNcjH3Rq5zYQ+Lcf4FAdziQcNEGR+53hJdS+Dmhe8dNIw/aN1P9 hesZDOGtkfh0Edb+/vDLVJ0pPyCGIVIheEVs3niW7aEhE/73bfH1dEw/1zpy9zu04gV65lztq +PdlJ7gloiMlf/KQWzFqMF/9NsHvUoiT8ekhDKuEVhpIaBIXDD3NWn31lvs1gB0YmRVwOmTQC oEFdhu9FcqcTWL6Y6rlWFWBNIHtB0xZZ0f6EbQecrpTTCt1yHB0lJFZmLpq9EtKrsTMxxteHu phn4KI9g+ad1fEgOnsy2oX3L0hRLOCJ6iRP5f2/FyK3TLiNrqArFHO3EhGGrdaFb/eUpumIXo dP+bbEBH5IV8QCEg7nAtmW83uOnkaE67qaMxEC7l5hgx1ZlCWIjibkAdHKOqs219X/9BQX/tp XajVg5DGM9OnXnrwJvQnRaEKmKBXZF+dJB0m9ReYXG0HOWsZX6In50yaPHAqA9mraq5WbLwAr Ia04THE Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > It would be different if your patches fixed actual bugs. I dare to point change possibilities out which correspond to a special error category. There can be different opinions about their relevance for further software improvements. > This is just mindless code transformations that MAY in the best case save a few bytes > of code here and there (I don't know; you didn't say). Do you know the run time characteristics for the discussed functions good enough? http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.11/source/fs/seq_file.c#L405 > But the potential gains from these incredibly numerous and tiny patches > that don't fix anything are so small, it's a waste of time, bandwidth, > and mental capacity for you and for everybody involved. I suggest a bit of code reduction at various places once more. > I just searched my inbox for patches from you and you sent literally > _hundreds_ over the past few days, I sent update suggestions in this scale since the year 2014. > all doing this crazy printf/puts/putc transformation. I agree that the corresponding number could be remarkable. But there are also other source code search patterns involved besides information around these logging functions. > Another bit of searching and I see that I'm not the first one giving you > this response: You are right that some agreements and disagreements were expressed already (depending on the software area). Regards, Markus