mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chen Gang <chengang@emindsoft.com.cn>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	nicolas.iooss_linux@m4x.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: dcache: Use bool return value instead of int
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 06:39:53 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5696D239.2000605@emindsoft.com.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160112222105.GT17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>


On 1/13/16 06:21, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 05:42:20AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> 
>> For me, it really generates a little better code:
>>
>>  - Both 1-word store and 1-byte store are 1 instruction, normally, they
>>    have the same execution speed (although it is not quite precise).
>>
>>  - But 1-byte store instruction has short length under CISC archs, which
>>    can generate a little better code globally.
>>
>>  - For most of archs, 1-word store can process bytes nonalignment cases,
>>    for check_mount() individually, the parameter data may be not word
>>    alignment, which may cause the 1-word store slower than 1-byte store.
> 
> What the hell do you mean, unaligned?  It's given an address of local
> variable of type int; it _will_ be aligned, or the compiler is FUBAR.
> 

I guess you misunderstand my meaning, in our case, it should not happen,
so I say "for check_mount() individually".

For 32 bits store instruction, we need consider about the byte alignment.

> As for the inlines... frankly, if gcc generates a different code from having
> replaced int with bool in those, it's time to do something very nasty to
> gcc developers.
> 

Could you provide the related proof?

Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang (陈刚)

Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

  reply	other threads:[~2016-01-13 22:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-11 21:30 chengang
2016-01-11 22:51 ` Al Viro
2016-01-12 21:42   ` Chen Gang
2016-01-12 22:21     ` Al Viro
2016-01-13 22:39       ` Chen Gang [this message]
2016-01-13 22:54         ` Al Viro
2016-01-14 15:39           ` Chen Gang
2016-01-24 21:19             ` Chen Gang
2016-01-24 21:27               ` Al Viro
2016-01-25 21:24                 ` Chen Gang
2016-01-12  0:33 ` David Howells
2016-01-12  1:02   ` Al Viro

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5696D239.2000605@emindsoft.com.cn \
    --to=chengang@emindsoft.com.cn \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas.iooss_linux@m4x.org \
    --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome