Re: [PATCH 0/3] SATA: Fine-tuning for two function implementations

From	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 0/3] SATA: Fine-tuning for two function implementations
Date	2017-05-11 17:10 +0200
Message-ID	<tFXT3-7X6-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<txHBL-22s-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tBm5H-55J-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tFXT3-7X6-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <tBm5H-55J-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi,

On Friday, April 28, 2017 05:53:34 PM Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:00:37PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 21:54:32 +0200
> > 
> > A few update suggestions were taken into account
> > from static source code analysis.
> 
> Hmmm, allocs -> callocs.  Are these actually beneficial?  If so, why?
> Because one multiplication is rolled into the call?

Each conversion (i.e. I tried the one from patch #1) seems to add
an extra 24 bytes to the resulting code size (using gcc 4.8.4 for
ARM32 cross-compilation) so I don't see much point in the automatic
conversions. Only instances containing size calculations with
real possibility for integer overflows should be converted and
the patchset under discussion contains no such instances.

Best regards,
--
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 0/3] SATA: Fine-tuning for two function implementations Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2017-04-29 00:00 +0200
  Re: SATA: Fine-tuning for two function implementations SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-04-29 10:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 0/3] SATA: Fine-tuning for two function implementations Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> - 2017-05-11 17:10 +0200

csiph-web