On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:24:29 +0800 "majianpeng" <majianpeng@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >From 7f9446682f64e28106dd52cd12bdf74a19fb4015 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: majianpeng <majianpeng@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 19:20:07 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] md/raid1:!conf->r1buf_pool is unlikely in function > sync_request. > > > Signed-off-by: majianpeng <majianpeng@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/md/raid1.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/md/raid1.c b/drivers/md/raid1.c > index 4a40a20..943b3b3 100644 > --- a/drivers/md/raid1.c > +++ b/drivers/md/raid1.c > @@ -2246,7 +2246,7 @@ static sector_t sync_request(struct mddev *mddev, sector_t sector_nr, int *skipp > int good_sectors = RESYNC_SECTORS; > int min_bad = 0; /* number of sectors that are bad in all devices */ > > - if (!conf->r1buf_pool) > + if (unlikely(!conf->r1buf_pool)) > if (init_resync(conf)) > return 0; > Hi, I'm really happy that you are reviewing the md patches and even finding some bugs. However I find the stream of occasional tiny patches somewhat distracting. Also I find micro-optimisation like this fairly pointless. You should only really use unlikely() when it will make a real difference to performance, and this change won't So I won't apply this patch. I'll keep looking though the others you have sent since but in future I would prefer it if you collected together little patches like this and send them as a group. If and when you find genuine bugs, feel free to send them straight away. Thanks, NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
