[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150112160147.27f5431a4674129690bff073@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 16:01:47 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gthelen@...gle.com
Subject: Re: +
mm-memcontrol-default-hierarchy-interface-for-memory-checkpatch-fixes.patch
added to -mm tree
On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:54:38 -0500 Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org> wrote:
> > +++ a/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -5337,7 +5337,7 @@ static int memory_low_show(struct seq_fi
> > unsigned long low = ACCESS_ONCE(memcg->low);
> >
> > if (low == 0)
> > - seq_printf(m, "none\n");
> > + seq_puts(m, "none\n");
> > else
> > seq_printf(m, "%llu\n", (u64)low * PAGE_SIZE);
>
> Hm, is that really an improvement to the code? With seq_printf() the
> calls in both branches align visually much nicer, IMO.
No, agree that it's visually worse. But puts() is faster and has a
much smaller cache footprint.
--
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