Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 15:19:20 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] trivial: Drop unlikely before IS_ERR(_OR_NULL)
Message-ID: <20150731094920.GB11856@linux>
References: <cover.1438331416.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <55BB42B5.5070409@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55BB42B5.5070409@suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 952
Lines: 27

On 31-07-15, 11:41, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> [+CC Steven Rostedt]
> 
> Any idea what the compiler does in the case of
> "if (likely(IS_ERR(...)))"? There are apparently such cases in the source.
> 
> does the "likely" somehow override the "unlikely" of IS_ERR, or is
> the resulting code a mess?

Good point. While fixing all the sites, I saw some code like that. Then before
posting the series, I tried to look at what compilers do to such codes and they
generated exactly same code for:

likely(unlikely(x)) and unlikely(x).

So, either those call sites should drop the likely bits or we supply them with
another raw version of the macro :)

Or if my tests were wrong, then please lemme know.

-- 
viresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/