From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932152AbdJXOwX (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 24 Oct 2017 10:52:23 -0400
Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:53825 "EHLO mout.web.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751318AbdJXOwT (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 24 Oct 2017 10:52:19 -0400
Subject: Re: drm/i915/gvt: Use common error handling code in
 shadow_workload_ring_buffer()
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
        Garry Hurley <garry.hurley.jr@gmail.com>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>, Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <f563de94-afaa-ecde-2907-d6baaad65939@users.sourceforge.net>
 <87efpsiu7r.fsf@intel.com>
 <636f6272-9074-53dc-2c90-cbb4a7cd0901@users.sourceforge.net>
 <1A433E6A-DE06-4407-9E33-3CBBA4ADF01B@gmail.com>
 <20171024142615.t3y5atz6nulkq55h@mwanda>
 <1508856148.1955.12.camel@perches.com>
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <d92e1137-3d4c-8735-ceb4-4664a5803cdf@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 16:51:54 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1508856148.1955.12.camel@perches.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:3ix+uS66fnYp7GsTXhxlHfcrcQG8gIODkgjKtQOt8Y6ZpRT8Xxg
 ThaBuhZOFUzCkVyBWWvNesnodQVbspTfcNxOVA9di4Ad44nWbUeuAet8mWzdnd0Pir6Ftt+
 q+FMW0wWseAKHJj5EP/Q0T4COqKOsgzBMuGcX976pva7MS/c4C3/ieX1M7UyoKNorFaA4kr
 AW7Aag3jj6Vrfd5mPRpsA==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:HKp+cpQHLyQ=:GSV5Rp9bhBhjDebUxPyXCq
 kyre9IZbkyFbTjxgAiuUsZCJEMAmiABeKB4zmnfNdkA1Rngz8RSBezTpskj494c/zKzig8lsW
 lU27ikdpFEPwqaRKDgJHo/EsI4bTkDcWkxkp7XDcc/uuIOFzSzuxNYZ5D/V0WBG1xPN1AKdyD
 r41wGLhx9Kb3SwdSMuGSMrvz0xiZQkgkg6vOqO7j4eZre4vd2RbwvqKrGq705y4HJUIsSgigk
 hRcVR6Waiw+Lcyr2Z0bhUibgK25LkEblyM1wEbQqKZ2CtqPx3iTxFTwoBBkc+QY7NXMmfUYc4
 UxiDaUnIltpJgzMzFyykPST9fvnz7RmPDYLDIbv2EmlTY4pPaNEwr7IAilPwMYgt82rG6rdES
 l+t1FTMxc+OeRQfuCCEHh0K+3pNCrdXb6oqQ9aeefMc2wXaBT8AfoQr+j/kOoe0Tum7+/ZqOP
 t+EmP4EEOoeSYIec+oNNB/TI4m3jWm3DmFKaaf0oAOu08TsEke+DQWCmhxhOxjEAjTD884Vea
 Cjic+zfM5XItDx055WCFzxu3M/3l3vH7MTB/f0VPjE2KvgIwmCp0rJk0iwQJzU0+sReLDaE+2
 +T5Wg7k3/4QmbhUkFTiuJL2zcQiqBSYb5hwU9fUWh7AUxlWAwpUlScXw0Z7M3VtLSKJ3ZWiUW
 k8wGx7IVbwdFEOUSYpKN3SNFzhAJTDgxakbYJvcmHi0mJisaV6Nfg7y2LysIqreh0iNixdJCh
 cWPeehnY1RKYFmOa/afjbD39nO2EASBk+P6wwIOj4lIYHzPUDxuUmGX7khmebD+Jz9R3CCdHp
 zcw0AWHXcceNezENnq8bhYmmjLOidI5rcPE7+IKnSe4kkOup4I=
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

>> …  It's just that two out of three error
>> messages happened to be the same and Markus wants to save a bit of
>> memory by using the same string.  The memory savings is not so big that
>> it's worth making the code less readable.
> 
> I agree with Dan.
> 
> It doesn't save any real memory either as the compiler/linker
> reuses the repeated string.

It might depend on passing appropriate parameters.


> It might, depending on the compiler, save a few bytes of
> object code as the compiler may not optimize the repeated
> call away though.

I am trying to show corresponding change possibilities.


> But a good compiler could do that too.

Do you prefer to delegate the proposed software refactoring
only to a corresponding optimiser?

Regards,
Markus