On 2/24/20 8:44 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >> Fine like this, though easier if you inline the patches so it's easier >> to comment on them. >> >> Agree that the first patch looks fine, though I don't quite see why >> you want to pass in opcode as a separate argument as it's always >> req->opcode. Seeing it separate makes me a bit nervous, thinking that >> someone is reading it again from the sqe, or maybe not passing in >> the right opcode for the given request. So that seems fragile and it >> should go away. > > I suppose it's to hint a compiler, that opcode haven't been changed > inside the first switch. And any compiler I used breaks analysis there > pretty easy. Optimising C is such a pain... But if the choice is between confusion/fragility/performance vs obvious and safe, then I'll go with the latter every time. We should definitely not pass in req and opcode separately. -- Jens Axboe
