Re: [PATCH] vfs: does call expand_files when needed

[AmÃrico Wang]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Liu Aleaxander <aleaxander@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>

>
>>it's trivial, not so much an improvement, IMO.
> So, shouldn't we do the optimize when there is a way to do that?
>
> While, I don't think so. And BTW, it's not just a problem of
> optimization, but also make it be more sense: JUST call expand when
> need. I don't know why you are rejecting about this, especially it did
> optimized one call path(as you said), and it doesn't make the code
> uglier than before but making it be more sense, and, in fact, a kind
> of more readable.


I am not rejecting it, I said this is trivial, so accepting it or droping
it both are OK for me.

I don't think the orignal code is ugly, '< fdt->max_fds' is not checked
for expand_files(), but for find_next_zero_bit().
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/