From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753411AbcAGU2z (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:28:55 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0172.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.172]:37442 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753194AbcAGU2x (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:28:53 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:973:988:989:1042:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1540:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3866:3867:3868:3872:3873:3874:4321:5007:6261:7903:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12114:12517:12519:12740:13069:13161:13229:13255:13311:13357:13894:14035:14659:21080:21324:30012:30034:30054:30070:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: cows34_4d4549770e153 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2168 Message-ID: <1452198530.4028.43.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts() after error detection From: Joe Perches To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: Robert Richter , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Sunil Goutham , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 12:28:50 -0800 In-Reply-To: <568EC56A.402@users.sourceforge.net> References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <5685A273.6070607@users.sourceforge.net> <20160107110701.GE25086@rric.localdomain> <568EBCE7.4060502@users.sourceforge.net> <1452195846.4028.24.camel@perches.com> <568EC2FD.9000702@users.sourceforge.net> <1452196790.4028.33.camel@perches.com> <568EC56A.402@users.sourceforge.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.3-1ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 21:07 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > * Which object code representations would you find representative > > >   for a further constructive discussion around this > > >   software component? > > > > Evidence of actual object code improvement > > How do you think about to provide a function implementation > which looks a bit more efficient by default? It's not a matter of "looks a bit more efficient". it's taste, style, and repetition for various functions. Some prefer that source code be "templatized" regardless of the number of exit points that any particular use of a specific function type. Some of your patches are converting these templatized functions to a different form for no added value. These patches make the local source code inconsistent and generally goes against the authors preferred style. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:28:50 +0000 Subject: Re: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts() after error detection Message-Id: <1452198530.4028.43.camel@perches.com> List-Id: References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <5685A273.6070607@users.sourceforge.net> <20160107110701.GE25086@rric.localdomain> <568EBCE7.4060502@users.sourceforge.net> <1452195846.4028.24.camel@perches.com> <568EC2FD.9000702@users.sourceforge.net> <1452196790.4028.33.camel@perches.com> <568EC56A.402@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: <568EC56A.402@users.sourceforge.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 21:07 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > * Which object code representations would you find representative > > > =A0 for a further constructive discussion around this > > > =A0 software component? > >=20 > > Evidence of actual object code improvement >=20 > How do you think about to provide a function implementation > which looks a bit more efficient by default? It's not a matter of "looks a bit more efficient". it's taste, style, and repetition for various functions. Some prefer that source code be "templatized" regardless of the number of exit points that any particular use of a specific function type. Some of your patches are converting these templatized functions to a different form for no added value. These patches make the local source code inconsistent and generally goes against the authors preferred style. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" = in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: joe@perches.com (Joe Perches) Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 12:28:50 -0800 Subject: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts() after error detection In-Reply-To: <568EC56A.402@users.sourceforge.net> References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <5685A273.6070607@users.sourceforge.net> <20160107110701.GE25086@rric.localdomain> <568EBCE7.4060502@users.sourceforge.net> <1452195846.4028.24.camel@perches.com> <568EC2FD.9000702@users.sourceforge.net> <1452196790.4028.33.camel@perches.com> <568EC56A.402@users.sourceforge.net> Message-ID: <1452198530.4028.43.camel@perches.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 21:07 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > > * Which object code representations would you find representative > > > ? for a further constructive discussion around this > > > ? software component? > > > > Evidence of actual object code improvement > > How do you think about to provide a function implementation > which looks a bit more efficient by default? It's not a matter of "looks a bit more efficient". it's taste, style, and repetition for various functions. Some prefer that source code be "templatized" regardless of the number of exit points that any particular use of a specific function type. Some of your patches are converting these templatized functions to a different form for no added value. These patches make the local source code inconsistent and generally goes against the authors preferred style.