On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 16:22:50 +0800, Li Hong <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, go ahead :) > > Thanks, > Li Hong
Done. Thanks, Ryusuke Konishi > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 04:58:47PM +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote: > > On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:17:26 +0800, Li Hong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 02:57:15AM +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:15:43 +0800, Li Hong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi KONISHI Ryusuke, > > > > > > > > > > Three new patches based on nilfs2/for-next branch. New code has been > > > > > built and > > > > > loaded successfully, and also passed a light-weight reads and writes > > > > > test. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Li Hong > > > > > > > > Ok, I'll look into each of them. > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------- cut here -------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > From 2c622d0f59782321204bf1fde7eea4a593cc6b65 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > > > From: Li Hong <[email protected]> > > > > > Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:57:11 +0800 > > > > > Subject: [PATCH 1/3] nilfs2: remove nilfs_segctor_init() in segment.c > > > > > > > > > > There are only two lines of code in nilfs_segctor_init(). From a > > > > > logic design > > > > > view, the first line 'sci->sc_seq_done = sci->sc_seq_request;' should > > > > > be put in > > > > > nilfs_segctor_new(). Even in nilfs_segctor_new(), this initialization > > > > > is > > > > > needless because sci is kzalloc-ed. So nilfs_segctor_init() is only a > > > > > wrap call > > > > > to nilfs_segctor_start_thread(). This removes an indirect call > > > > > overhead. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Li Hong <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Looks no problem. > > > > > > > > The reason why nilfs_segctor_init is present in that manner is > > > > historical (just for your information. You don't have to mention this > > > > reason). > > > > > > > > I think you don't have to mention the indirect call overhead because > > > > it's only triggered in the level of mount/unmount/remount and gcc will > > > > inline it in the caller. > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > No, there is no inline key word in nilfs_segctor_init(). > > > > > Unless you mean gcc will try to inline small procedures if possible. > > > > I mean this ;) > > > > By "objdump -D segment.o", you can actually see the function is > > inlined in the caller. It's a default thing nowadays unless > > "noinline" keyword is specified. > > > > Anyway, the only point I feel odd is the description. Basically, I'd > > like to apply this patch for cleanup. May I remove the comment "this > > removes an indrect call oveahead"? > > > > Thanks, > > Ryusuke Konishi > > > > > Thanks, > > > Li Hong > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ryusuke Konishi > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > fs/nilfs2/segment.c | 9 +-------- > > > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > > > > > index f235fc0..514620d 100644 > > > > > --- a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > > > > > +++ b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c > > > > > @@ -2684,13 +2684,6 @@ static void nilfs_segctor_kill_thread(struct > > > > > nilfs_sc_info *sci) > > > > > } > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > -static int nilfs_segctor_init(struct nilfs_sc_info *sci) > > > > > -{ > > > > > - sci->sc_seq_done = sci->sc_seq_request; > > > > > - > > > > > - return nilfs_segctor_start_thread(sci); > > > > > -} > > > > > - > > > > > /* > > > > > * Setup & clean-up functions > > > > > */ > > > > > @@ -2814,7 +2807,7 @@ int nilfs_attach_segment_constructor(struct > > > > > nilfs_sb_info *sbi) > > > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > > > > > > > nilfs_attach_writer(nilfs, sbi); > > > > > - err = nilfs_segctor_init(NILFS_SC(sbi)); > > > > > + err = nilfs_segctor_start_thread(NILFS_SC(sbi)); > > > > > if (err) { > > > > > nilfs_detach_writer(nilfs, sbi); > > > > > kfree(sbi->s_sc_info); > > > > > -- > > > > > 1.6.3.3 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe > > > > > linux-nilfs" in > > > > > the body of a message to [email protected] > > > > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
