On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 08:27:01AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 20:16:47 +0200, James Bottomley wrote: >> We all assume that msecs_to_jiffies is properly optimized so there >> should be no need to open code it like you're proposing. > > Yes, it'd be best if the compiler can handle it properly. I've tried, and can't figure out how to get the compiler to detect this special case and not invoke the general code. In particular, for a variable x, __builtin_constant_p(x * 1000 % 1000) is false. Even if x is signed and ANSI lets the compiler assume that overflow doesn't happen. If you can do it, I'm most curious how! > But also I meant to keep using the macro for consistency reason. > IIRC, we wanted to eliminate the explicit use of HZ in the past, and > it's how many lines have been converted with *_to_jiffies() calls. > I don't know whether the eliminate of HZ is still wished, but > reverting to the open code is a step backward for that. Well, you could always add a secs_to_jiffies(x) wrapper. But given that it expands to basically x * HZ, some people might wonder why you're bothering. I assumed that open-coding x * HZ was the preferred style, so that's what I did.
