In message <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709261845110.7066@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Engelhardt writes: > > On Sep 26 2007 11:43, Erez Zadok wrote: > > > >*That's* the information I was looking for, Kyle: what's the estimated > >probability I should be using as my guideline. I used 95% (20/1 ratio), and > > ;-) > > 19:1 <=> 95:5 <=> 95% <=> ratio=0.95 != 20.0 (=20/1) > > >you're telling me I should use 99% (100/1 ratio). The difference between > > 99:1 <=> 99% <=> ratio=0.99 != 100.0 (=100/1) > > >the number of cycles saved/added is very compelling. Given that I certainly > >agree with you that I'm using un/likely too much. I'll re-evaluate and > >update my patch series then. Yeah, close enough. :-) The important issue is that I'm probably using about five times too many un/likely wrappers. Erez. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
