[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJJ6jxsv_RZdXdRjqJzHGJqySkwNGitzO1gQ=tMCVy56FMWNjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 17:09:03 -0700
From: Steve Calfee <stevecalfee@...il.com>
To: Eric Curtin <ericcurtin17@...il.com>
Cc: Valentina Manea <valentina.manea.m@...il.com>,
shuah.kh@...sung.com, USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: First kernel patch (optimization)
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Eric Curtin <ericcurtin17@...il.com> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Eric Curtin <ericcurtin17@...il.com>
>
> diff --git a/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_detach.c b/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_detach.c
> index 05c6d15..9db9d21 100644
> --- a/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_detach.c
> +++ b/tools/usb/usbip/src/usbip_detach.c
> @@ -47,7 +47,9 @@ static int detach_port(char *port)
> uint8_t portnum;
> char path[PATH_MAX+1];
>
> - for (unsigned int i = 0; i < strlen(port); i++)
> + unsigned int port_len = strlen(port);
> +
> + for (unsigned int i = 0; i < port_len; i++)
> if (!isdigit(port[i])) {
> err("invalid port %s", port);
> return -1;
>
> --
Hi Eric,
This is fine, but what kind of wimpy compiler optimizer will not move
the constant initializer out of the loop? I bet if you compare binary
sizes/code it will be exactly the same, and you added some characters
of code. Reorganizing code for readability is fine, but for compiler
(in)efficiency seems like a bad idea.
Regards, 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