On Sun, 9 Nov 2025 at 14:33, Mateusz Guzik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The programs which pass in these "too long" names just keep doing it,
Sure. So what?
We optimize for the common case.
Sure, there's an extra SMAP sequence for people using longer names,
but while those SMAP things are costly compared to individual
instructions, they aren't costly in the *big* picture.
They are a pipeline stall, not some kind of horrendous thing.
It would be *more* expensive to try to keep statistics than it is to
just say "long pathnames are more expensive than short ones".
Linus
