[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120222155110.GB28314@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 16:51:10 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, davem@...emloft.net,
ddaney.cavm@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups +
docs
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 02/22/2012 12:18 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > For example could you tell *at a glance* what this does:
> >
> > + if (!static_branch_def_false(&perf_sched_events.key))
> >
> > ?
>
> Yes. [...]
You have specially built eyes I guess - congrats, you are member
of the 1% :-)
> [...] Unlike
>
> > + if (very_unlikely(&perf_sched_events.key))
>
> ... which is actively misleading.
Misleading in what way? It clearly conveys that the slowpath
that follows is a slowpath, that what follows is 'very
unlikely'.
This is how all current kernel code is using these facilities.
If you have a new usecase (CPU feature flags) then you should
outline that, instead of expecting something of current usecases
that they are clearly not ...
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists