[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1501706149.31625.10.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:35:49 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] get_maintainer: Prepare for separate MAINTAINERS
files
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 11:15 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > IMO, the parse-maintainters.pl (sorting) script makes the need for separate
> > MAINTAINERS files much less important since the file can be "fixed" easily
> > at any time.
>
> For me it's not the "fixing". It's the inevitable merge mess, and the
> two hundred commits that I have to go through.
>
> That said, the extra time just to look for MAINTAINERS files makes me
> unhappy. It may be just .3s on Joe's machine, but it's presumably much
> more when things aren't in the filesystem caches. I (like apparently
> Joe) have an SSD so it's not a big deal for me, but..
>
> Just having a single MAINTAINERS directory would alleviate that concern.
Yeah. Quite a bit. With an i5-6200 and an SSD:
Looking for all MAINTAINERS files:
Cold cache find:
$ time find . -not \( -path ./.git -prune \) -name MAINTAINERS
./drivers/staging/unisys/MAINTAINERS
./MAINTAINERS
real 0m3.129s
user 0m0.368s
sys 0m0.828s
Warm cache find:
$ time find . -not \( -path ./.git -prune \) -name MAINTAINERS
./drivers/staging/unisys/MAINTAINERS
./MAINTAINERS
real 0m0.151s
user 0m0.084s
sys 0m0.064s
vs looking for all files in MAINTAINERS directory
Cold cache:
$ time find MAINTAINERS.tmp/ | wc -l
1736
real 0m0.037s
user 0m0.016s
sys 0m0.012s
Warm cache:
$ time find MAINTAINERS.tmp/ | wc -l
1736
real 0m0.017s
user 0m0.012s
sys 0m0.008s
Powered by blists - more mailing lists