[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <o5496n8r-451p-751-3258-97112opns7s8@vanv.qr>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 10:32:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
cc: 'Bill Wendling' <morbo@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Bill Wendling <isanbard@...il.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>,
Ross Philipson <ross.philipson@...cle.com>,
Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"coreteam@...filter.org" <coreteam@...filter.org>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
clang-built-linux <llvm@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/12] Clang -Wformat warning fixes
On Friday 2022-06-10 10:17, David Laight wrote:
>>
>> Calling a "printf" style function is already insanely expensive. :-) I
>> understand that it's not okay blithely to increase runtime resources
>> simply because it's already slow, but in this case it's worthwhile.
>
>Yep, IMHO definitely should be fixed.
>It is even possible that using "%s" is faster because the printf
>code doesn't have to scan the string for format effectors.
I see no special handling; the vsnprintf function just loops
over fmt as usual and I see no special casing of fmt by
e.g. strcmp(fmt, "%s") == 0 to take a shortcut.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists