From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>,
Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>,
Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>
Cc: Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v3 2/3] coccinelle: api: extend memdup_user rule with vmemdup_user()
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:44:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c6809db7-2979-7057-5cac-d2d1a57e77e2@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2007220823050.2918@hadrien>
>> Under which circumstances would you begin to care more for involved differences
>> in corresponding run time characteristics?
>
> When the difference is hours vs seconds.
Such a view can be influenced by execution environments in considerable ways.
> In this case, there are tradeoffs between the two options,
I am trying to improve the awareness for possible software design variations.
> andI don't know which would be faster,
I am curious if more contributors would get into the mood to compare
data processing approaches a bit more.
> but I think it is extremely unlikely that the difference is noticible.
But the following effects may be known for the evaluation of a SmPL rule
which was combined for two code parts.
* The SmPL dependencies are checked only once.
* Can the source code search efforts be reduced a bit?
> But if you are concerned about it, you are welcome to try.
Will anybody become interested to measure the software behaviour exactly?
Regards,
Markus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-22 6:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-21 9:30 [PATCH v3 " Markus Elfring
2020-07-21 9:58 ` Julia Lawall
2020-07-21 11:01 ` [v3 " Markus Elfring
2020-07-22 5:50 ` [PATCH v3 " Markus Elfring
2020-07-22 6:02 ` Julia Lawall
2020-07-22 6:09 ` [v3 " Markus Elfring
2020-07-22 6:24 ` Julia Lawall
2020-07-22 6:44 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
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=c6809db7-2979-7057-5cac-d2d1a57e77e2@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=efremov@linux.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
/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