linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1]] lib/btree.c: optimise the code by previously getpos function

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <3536E761-5A51-4B77-8F6C-D0C1A5E2B65C@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Apr 2017 22:48:15 +0800
From:   Leno Hou <lenohou@...il.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1]] lib/btree.c: optimise the code by previously getpos
 function


> On 13 Apr 2017, at 1:32 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 06:03:10PM +0800, Leno Hou wrote:
>> 1. Actually, this is cleanup of the code to human being read but not
>> optimize. And When I compiled the kernel
>>    and checked with object code . It proved as same as before. So it's no
>> need to test this change.
>> 
>> 2. This Simple B+ Tree in Memory was used by SCSI driver QLA2XXX. so it
>> would be better to merge this
>>   cleanup for future optimize. Thanks.
> 
> If you care about the btree code a good first step would be to write a
> test suite instead of micro-optimizing it out of the blue without
> actually being able to test it.

OK. Thanks Christoph, I’m the newbie of kernel developer and will take more
time to search how to write test suite to prove that was optimized.

-Leno Hou