All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Richard Kuo <rkuo@codeaurora.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Hexagon-setup: Combine four seq_printf() calls into one call in show_cpuinfo()
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 20:28:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4263abec-0a2c-d37d-7a35-47648ae0dcac@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161021175317.nnb2keq7m3phwgbv@thunk.org>

Am 21.10.2016 um 19:53 schrieb Theodore Ts'o:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 07:33:30PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>
>>> but (a) this isn't performance critical,
>>
>> This can be.
> 
> In this case, no, it really can't possibly be performance critical.
> If you can't see why, you have no business trying to send patches.
> 
>>> and (b) the number of bytes saved is really tiny.
>>
>> I imagine that the corresponding code and data size reduction could
>> be occasionally useful, couldn't it?
> 
> Note that in some cases, attempts to shirnk the code by tiny amounts
> can actually, paradoxically, cause the code to actually *expand*.  In
> any case, shrinking the kernel by 0.00015% really won't matter, since
> for no other reason, we round memory used to 4k pages.
> 
> So keeping the code easily readible is aslo a consideration that needs
> to be taken into acconut.
> 
>>> But at least if the compiler was doing the work, it would at least deal with
>>> it everywhere.
>>
>> I would find such an optimisation possibility also nice.
>>
>> Can it become acceptable to achieve a similar effect by the application
>> of scripts for the semantic patch language in the meantime?
> 
> The problem with scripts like this is that they very clearly don't
> have any human judgement.  And when the person using the scripts also
> doesn't seem to have good judgement, it's a real problem.
> 
> When the author of the semantic patch language is telling you to stand down,

A collaboration evolved between Julia and me during the years
where different software development opinions can be usual.
There are eventually further opinions from Linux contributors like you.


> and you still want to try to argue for blind application of patches,


> we have a really big problem. 
> Especially when some of your patches have actually introduced bugs.
> 
> 					- Ted
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Richard Kuo <rkuo@codeaurora.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Hexagon-setup: Combine four seq_printf() calls into one call in show_cpuinfo()
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 18:28:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4263abec-0a2c-d37d-7a35-47648ae0dcac@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161021175317.nnb2keq7m3phwgbv@thunk.org>

Am 21.10.2016 um 19:53 schrieb Theodore Ts'o:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 07:33:30PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>
>>> but (a) this isn't performance critical,
>>
>> This can be.
> 
> In this case, no, it really can't possibly be performance critical.
> If you can't see why, you have no business trying to send patches.
> 
>>> and (b) the number of bytes saved is really tiny.
>>
>> I imagine that the corresponding code and data size reduction could
>> be occasionally useful, couldn't it?
> 
> Note that in some cases, attempts to shirnk the code by tiny amounts
> can actually, paradoxically, cause the code to actually *expand*.  In
> any case, shrinking the kernel by 0.00015% really won't matter, since
> for no other reason, we round memory used to 4k pages.
> 
> So keeping the code easily readible is aslo a consideration that needs
> to be taken into acconut.
> 
>>> But at least if the compiler was doing the work, it would at least deal with
>>> it everywhere.
>>
>> I would find such an optimisation possibility also nice.
>>
>> Can it become acceptable to achieve a similar effect by the application
>> of scripts for the semantic patch language in the meantime?
> 
> The problem with scripts like this is that they very clearly don't
> have any human judgement.  And when the person using the scripts also
> doesn't seem to have good judgement, it's a real problem.
> 
> When the author of the semantic patch language is telling you to stand down,

A collaboration evolved between Julia and me during the years
where different software development opinions can be usual.
There are eventually further opinions from Linux contributors like you.


> and you still want to try to argue for blind application of patches,


> we have a really big problem. 
> Especially when some of your patches have actually introduced bugs.
> 
> 					- Ted
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-23  6:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-21  6:33 [PATCH] Hexagon-setup: Combine four seq_printf() calls into one call in show_cpuinfo() SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21  6:33 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21  7:20 ` Julia Lawall
2016-10-21  7:20   ` Julia Lawall
2016-10-21  9:00   ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21  9:00     ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21 15:46     ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-10-21 15:46       ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-10-21 17:33       ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21 17:33         ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21 17:53         ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-10-21 17:53           ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-10-21 18:28           ` SF Markus Elfring [this message]
2016-10-21 18:28             ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21 18:50           ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-21 18:50             ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-10-25 21:37             ` Richard Kuo
2016-10-25 21:37               ` Richard Kuo

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=4263abec-0a2c-d37d-7a35-47648ae0dcac@users.sourceforge.net \
    --to=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rkuo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.