Hi,
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:15:43 +0800, Li Hong <lihong.hi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi KONISHI Ryusuke,
>
> Three new patches based on nilfs2/for-next branch. New code has been built and
> loaded successfully, and also passed a light-weight reads and writes test.
>
> Thanks,
> Li Hong
Ok, I'll look into each of them.
> ---------------------------- cut here --------------------------
>
> From 2c622d0f59782321204bf1fde7eea4a593cc6b65 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Li Hong <lihong.hi@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:57:11 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] nilfs2: remove nilfs_segctor_init() in segment.c
>
> There are only two lines of code in nilfs_segctor_init(). From a logic design
> view, the first line 'sci->sc_seq_done = sci->sc_seq_request;' should be put in
> nilfs_segctor_new(). Even in nilfs_segctor_new(), this initialization is
> needless because sci is kzalloc-ed. So nilfs_segctor_init() is only a wrap call
> to nilfs_segctor_start_thread(). This removes an indirect call overhead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li Hong <lihong.hi@xxxxxxxxx>
Looks no problem.
The reason why nilfs_segctor_init is present in that manner is
historical (just for your information. You don't have to mention this
reason).
I think you don't have to mention the indirect call overhead because
it's only triggered in the level of mount/unmount/remount and gcc will
inline it in the caller.
Thanks,
Ryusuke Konishi
> ---
> fs/nilfs2/segment.c | 9 +--------
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c
> index f235fc0..514620d 100644
> --- a/fs/nilfs2/segment.c
> +++ b/fs/nilfs2/segment.c
> @@ -2684,13 +2684,6 @@ static void nilfs_segctor_kill_thread(struct nilfs_sc_info *sci)
> }
> }
>
> -static int nilfs_segctor_init(struct nilfs_sc_info *sci)
> -{
> - sci->sc_seq_done = sci->sc_seq_request;
> -
> - return nilfs_segctor_start_thread(sci);
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Setup & clean-up functions
> */
> @@ -2814,7 +2807,7 @@ int nilfs_attach_segment_constructor(struct nilfs_sb_info *sbi)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> nilfs_attach_writer(nilfs, sbi);
> - err = nilfs_segctor_init(NILFS_SC(sbi));
> + err = nilfs_segctor_start_thread(NILFS_SC(sbi));
> if (err) {
> nilfs_detach_writer(nilfs, sbi);
> kfree(sbi->s_sc_info);
> --
> 1.6.3.3
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
