On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> x86 does not need to offset the address. So we can skip that costing offset >>>> searching. >>> >>> I tried to start a discussion about this patch (and others), but I >>> don't think you responded: >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=133036414506921&w=2 >> >> this patch does reduce some not needed ops. >> >> and it does not affects your effects, > > It does affect my efforts in that this patch adds back x86 complexity > that I don't think is necessary. > > And this patch makes it so the pci_add_resource_offset() interface > exists and appears to work on x86, but if somebody tries to use it, it > *doesn't* work. I don't like to write code like that. I think it's > poor style. > >> and it just make x86 not get punished. > > What punishment are you worried about? I really don't think you'll be > able to measure any performance impact. > > I agree that the x86 code you add *is* simpler than the generic > version. But I think the *overall* complexity is higher because now > you have to look at two versions (generic and x86) and convince > yourself that it's safe to use the x86 version. > fine, i will that patch. Yinghai -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
