On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:17 AM, SF Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I see a need to improve not only correctness there but also a bit of >>> software efficiency. >> >> If you can measure any performance difference and present some results >> (esp. considering that this is something that just happens when the >> driver is loaded), then we'll talk. > > Are you really interested to increase your software development attention > for a quicker exception handling implementation in this function? > No one is interested in making error handling more complex for a non-existent benefit ;-) > >> Until then, please don't send this sort of patch. Thank you. > > Will benchmark statistics change such a change rejection ever? If you could demonstrate a real benefit to additional complexity for something that actually matters (ie. not something like this that runs once at bootup) I would care. I don't recommend that you waste your time, since there is approximately nothing in modesetting path that happens with a high enough frequency to benefit from such a micro-optimization. Especially not initialization code that runs once at boot up. Fixing actual bugs is useful and valuable. Premature "optimization" at the expense of extra complexity is very much not useful. BR, -R > Regards, > Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
