[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130813153703.GE2869@moon>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 19:37:03 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xemul@...allels.com, mpm@...enic.com,
xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mtosatti@...hat.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...il.com, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
peterz@...radead.org, aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] [PATCH] mm: Save soft-dirty bits on file pages
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 08:14:39AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/12/2013 10:02 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >
> > There is a case when you don't need a mask completely. And because this
> > pte conversion is on hot path and time critical I kept generated code
> > as it was (even if that lead to slightly less clear source code).
> >
>
> Does it actually matter, generated-code-wise, or is the compiler smart
> enough to figure it out? The reason I'm asking is because it makes the
gcc-4.7.2 is smart enough to suppress useless masking (ie ((1u << 31) - 1))
completely but I don't know if this can be assumed for all gcc series.
> code much harder to follow.
I see. OK, I'll try to prepare more readable macro helpers.
>
> The other thing is can we please pretty please call it something other
> than "frob"?
Sure.
--
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