From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753139AbcAGT5d (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:57:33 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:64764 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752844AbcAGT5b (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:57:31 -0500 Subject: Re: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts() after error detection To: Joe Perches 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> Cc: Robert Richter , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Sunil Goutham , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall From: SF Markus Elfring X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <568EC2FD.9000702@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 20:56:45 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1452195846.4028.24.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:uvwRdPtJ0jNM1AkmpRspMRFnsXSNnyQfqzQv3ZBHUorNUubFwBr OczH1tjFFkq+QK1AWmmT00YHfUoJ94/nR8L9LLjnyu55JavP71tgys7r7xEZyKRUOcXwJSv rTRDPF6l9DVQDLo8ScE6CmGKXyG0ZkgMe2ExNRc1YA3HiGHBMiEMjbN8Ne6n67E8cU161Sf jp7XCjQYzVU9z29CgiuRQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Jv1R4ESWNsk=:vfPCFJDZfbXfxnAIGemi6x tMZHhDANC/y/9ZKMpTwlWBeL8XWpaaIEZUPJJ7DDawKJ0TY5A9ARZ+KPxK0NdGmiY1WfXgeo/ kGdqxUyukAHUF3veqbA96D5A7hGrcLKK6i1heJdXTqRpplY8NLx5tt2ClyGPktZFcMXxb+Ez+ cCVp4Mt+IgAUWMARpV0Y3kfmqwsZv266kphofg1tB5Xnh5ty56ijmrSYIFemGaoX4ztU6ui60 Z1ct3IeyZSFMO9aIX85HXAbYqJdHX9p9pDQm9oi6naZj14bNeUIi84GN22C/EKU+1nt1iRtbi LSFyILn2OVEXGwiyi+6RsNmWx4uQN88zjtqxJm81ZBjWyJp5C+es/zLeqOyhpZwKir52ERx68 g6yqzV9/7wiKs/Up/8X5tz9W6DHft21+j6Xpd526KUUezp/s/+w36+KCqwueVt47x/dQ+gGb4 55DtMeV0/bBgbWauGLV2f7T7Uo4DaLxmUVoSHOAIYOhZNsJnrLLRq9GgZUTkwyu3VVSpPkE3z qBKF+pXYqqZG9BwUayVrjYbRJ2SPOsCHhpBs2XZxpAhReRkoOIu3z4WjsztOj6g/8e0WzeJGo xuDQG8sxeBCBSkiasbvLwKUs/yrhOJD2J2O6MkYG5NBv8eQj8pzlIyJgEd+hoWqsYWnYym1oj v7CFIlY1FQW8gs/4dVgqHVQoNiTCudeFkfFlDR17EK0aEd2cFTRoODykkSPEBCpvXgKkXCi/P GW5PHUSRj4VAP0R2Ml5pE9FwHJ/FVJj2gZKv3asvrlCaDqhYA/fcWJheC26NSegDTDsFv2xSW /m+cK+1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Is it a bit more efficient to avoid a double check for the >> variable "ret" at the end of the current implementation for the >> discussed function? > > Before asking questions you could answer yourself, > please look at object code produced by the compiler > before and after your proposed changes. * Do any more source code reviewers wonder about the need for such a double check? * Which object code representations would you find representative for a further constructive discussion around this software component? Regards, Markus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 19:56:45 +0000 Subject: Re: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts() after error detection Message-Id: <568EC2FD.9000702@users.sourceforge.net> 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> In-Reply-To: <1452195846.4028.24.camel@perches.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> Is it a bit more efficient to avoid a double check for the >> variable "ret" at the end of the current implementation for the >> discussed function? > > Before asking questions you could answer yourself, > please look at object code produced by the compiler > before and after your proposed changes. * Do any more source code reviewers wonder about the need for such a double check? * Which object code representations would you find representative for a further constructive discussion around this software component? Regards, Markus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 20:56:45 +0100 Subject: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts() after error detection In-Reply-To: <1452195846.4028.24.camel@perches.com> 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> Message-ID: <568EC2FD.9000702@users.sourceforge.net> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org >> Is it a bit more efficient to avoid a double check for the >> variable "ret" at the end of the current implementation for the >> discussed function? > > Before asking questions you could answer yourself, > please look at object code produced by the compiler > before and after your proposed changes. * Do any more source code reviewers wonder about the need for such a double check? * Which object code representations would you find representative for a further constructive discussion around this software component? Regards, Markus