[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070709083431.GA14761@lazybastard.org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 10:34:32 +0200
From: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...l.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Faster ext2_clear_inode()
On Mon, 9 July 2007 08:11:22 +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>
> If CONFIG_EXT2_FS_POSIX_ACL is not configured, ext2_clear_inode() will be empty
> function. However, there still will be call and immediate return which can be
> avoided.
> [...]
> +#ifdef CONFIG_EXT2_FS_POSIX_ACL
> static void ext2_clear_inode(struct inode *inode)
> {
> -#ifdef CONFIG_EXT2_FS_POSIX_ACL
> struct ext2_inode_info *ei = EXT2_I(inode);
>
> if (ei->i_acl && ei->i_acl != EXT2_ACL_NOT_CACHED) {
> @@ -197,8 +197,10 @@ static void ext2_clear_inode(struct inode *inode)
> posix_acl_release(ei->i_default_acl);
> ei->i_default_acl = EXT2_ACL_NOT_CACHED;
> }
> -#endif
> }
> +#else
> +#define ext2_clear_inode NULL
> +#endif
Are you sure your patch makes a difference? Does the resulting binary
change at all?
Jörn
--
Fancy algorithms are slow when n is small, and n is usually small.
Fancy algorithms have big constants. Until you know that n is
frequently going to be big, don't get fancy.
-- Rob Pike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists