Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1197974 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-01 13:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-08-01 13:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 14/15] mm: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2015-08-01 13:20 +0200
| From | Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-01 13:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 14/15] mm: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL) |
| Message-ID | <pSCZA-359-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On 31-07-15, 11:00, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2015-07-31 at 16:36 +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 31-07-15, 03:28, Joe Perches wrote: > > > If it's all fixed, then it's unlikely to be needed in checkpatch. > > > > I thought checkpatch is more about not committing new mistakes, rather than > > finding them in old code. > > True, but checkpatch is more about style than substance. > > There are a lot of things that _could_ be added to the script > but don't have to be because of relative rarity. > > The unanswered fundamental though is whether the unlikely use > in #define IS_ERR_VALUE is useful. > > include/linux/err.h:21:#define IS_ERR_VALUE(x) unlikely((x) >= (unsigned long)-MAX_ERRNO) > > How often does using unlikely here make the code smaller/faster > with more recent compilers than gcc 3.4? Or even using gcc 3.4. No idea :) -- viresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web