Hi Dan,
On 2019/2/15 17:35, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 05:32:33PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2019/2/15 15:57, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 03:02:25PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2019/2/1 20:16, Gao Xiang wrote:
- /*
* on-disk error, let's only BUG_ON in the debugging mode.* otherwise, it will return 1 to just skip the invalid name* and go on (in consideration of the lookup performance).*/- DBG_BUGON(qd->name > qd->end);
qd->name == qd->end is not allowed as well?
So will it be better to return directly here?
if (unlikely(qd->name >= qd->end)) { DBG_BUGON(1); return 1; }
Please don't add likely/unlikely() annotations unless you have benchmarked it and it makes a difference.
Well, it only occur for corrupted image, since the image is readonly, so it is really rare.
The likely/unlikely() annotations make the code harder to read. It's only worth it if it's is a speedup on a fast path.
Yes, I think abuse of using likely/unlikely() should be avoided (I agree that some odd likely/unlikely() exists in the current code, that should be cleaned up).
However, likely/unlikely()s are also clearly highlight critical/corner paths). I personally think it should be used in case-by-case basis rather than a unified conclusion ("that makes the code harder to read").
Thanks, Gao Xiang
regards, dan carpenter
devel mailing list devel@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel