linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/22] advansys: Eliminate prototypes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 09 Sep 2007 11:29:34 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
CC:	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/22] advansys: Eliminate prototypes

Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Rearrange a lot of the functions in the file to get rid of all the forward
> declarations.

What thoughts, if any, have been given to post-patch code arrangement, 
besides eliminating prototypes?

This always struck me as a counterproductive exercise when taken by 
itself.  Sure, prototypes were eliminated, but was code packed together 
in an efficient way afterwards?  Ideally hot path code should be close 
together, ditto for various other things like error handling code.

Without further explanation or details about your post-patch analysis, 
how do we even know the new code arrangement doesn't negatively impact 
i-cache overall?

	Jeff

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/