Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261466AbVC0TZn (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:25:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261468AbVC0TZn (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:25:43 -0500 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.202]:42292 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261466AbVC0TZi (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:25:38 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=FCFFf6wCmXHuMs+ZEy+D2BnezUOJ7P4lrbGdabSaJH27wWXTkYbP2Byan3ibiusC3S1iPwGiTnTe+7izU0dbruHQVvNV6d18KJ3NdAUWsrcCFs1/15z6IwjLRRryI9X4x9Q/ljaAcz7/bB+601I8NuQh1UcPRHAEQqUTElzichs= Message-ID: <84144f0205032711257b5ca1e2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 22:25:37 +0300 From: Pekka Enberg Reply-To: Pekka Enberg To: Dave Jones , Jan Engelhardt , Linux Kernel Mailing List , penberg@cs.helsinki.fi Subject: Re: [PATCH] no need to check for NULL before calling kfree() -fs/ext2/ In-Reply-To: <20050327174026.GA708@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <1111825958.6293.28.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1111881955.957.11.camel@mindpipe> <20050327065655.6474d5d6.pj@engr.sgi.com> <20050327174026.GA708@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1037 Lines: 21 On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 12:40:26 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > Am I the only person who is completely fascinated by the > effort being spent here micro-optimising something thats > almost never in a path that needs optimising ? > I'd be amazed if any of this masturbation showed the tiniest > blip on a real workload, or even on a benchmark other than > one crafted specifically to test kfree in a loop. Indeed. The NULL checks are redundant and thus need to go. If someone can show a measurable performance regression in the kernel for a realistic workload, kfree() can be turned into an inline function which will take care of it. The microbenchmarks are fun but should not stand in the way of merging the kfree() cleanups from Jesper and others. Pekka - 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/