Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <46fcdf08-4646-afa0-c112-76d9335adb6c@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jun 2022 08:11:49 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/34] Printbufs - new data structure for building
 strings
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, pmladek@suse.com
Cc:     rostedt@goodmis.org, enozhatsky@chromium.org, willy@infradead.org
References: <20220620004233.3805-1-kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
In-Reply-To: <20220620004233.3805-1-kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 20/06/2022 02.41, Kent Overstreet wrote:

>   Rasmus pointed out that -fno-strict-aliasing is going to cause gcc to generate
>   nasty code, and indeed it unfortunately does but according to worst case
>   scenario microbenchmarks it's not a problem for actual performance. 

Well, that's not how I interpreted those numbers, but, except if they
showed an improvement, how much is acceptable is of course always a
matter of judgment.

However, what's really annoying and somewhat dishonest is that you're
not including those numbers, nor the methodology, in either the cover
letter or commit itself.

Rasmus