[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150720211529.2c0a311d@grimm.local.home>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 21:15:29 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 15/16] scripts: Make checkpatch.pl warn on
expedited RCU grace periods
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:06:19 -0700
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-07-20 at 20:55 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 15:37:54 -0700
> > Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > + if ($line =~ /\b(synchronize_rcu_expedited|synchronize_sched_expedited)\(/) {
> > >
> > > It'd be faster perl without capture groups:
> >
> > Is checkpatch such a critical code path that we could possibly notice
> > the difference in speed? Although the above may be few microseconds
> > slower, to me, the above looks a hell of a lot more readable.
>
> Regardless, it's not as capable as it wouldn't find
> any miswritten form like
>
> synchronize_<foo>_expedited ( args... )
Then that's a better rational than performance.
-- Steve
--
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