From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964988AbcAYSiZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:38:25 -0500 Received: from mail-yk0-f170.google.com ([209.85.160.170]:36527 "EHLO mail-yk0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964963AbcAYSiS (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:38:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56A6680B.9050200@users.sourceforge.net> References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <56818B7B.8040801@users.sourceforge.net> <20160125150654.7ada12ac@recife.lan> <56A6680B.9050200@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:38:17 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] [media] xc5000: Faster result reporting in xc_load_fw_and_init_tuner() From: Devin Heitmueller To: SF Markus Elfring Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux Media Mailing List , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Are you interested in a bit of software optimisation for the implementation > of the function "xc_load_fw_and_init_tuner"? To be clear, absolutely none of the code in question is performance sensitive (i.e. saving a couple of extra CPU cycles has no value in this case). Hence given that I'm assuming you have no intention to actually test any of these patches with a real device I would recommend you do the bare minimum to prevent Coccinelle from complaining and not restructure any of the core business logic unless you plan to also do actual testing. Thanks, Devin -- Devin J. Heitmueller - Kernel Labs http://www.kernellabs.com