From: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Faster ext2_clear_inode() Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:12:18 +0200 Message-ID: <20070709221218.GB18501@lazybastard.org> References: <20070709041122.GA5889@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> <20070709083431.GA14761@lazybastard.org> <20070709180148.GA5747@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> <20070709200003.GA18501@lazybastard.org> <1184018540.6820.5.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel , Alexey Dobriyan , akpm@osdl.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Kleikamp Return-path: Received: from lazybastard.de ([212.112.238.170]:38426 "EHLO longford.lazybastard.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754375AbXGIWPv (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2007 18:15:51 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1184018540.6820.5.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 9 July 2007 17:02:20 -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote: >=20 > It's not a direct call to a static function. It is called as a > super_ops method. I don't think the overhead is very significant, bu= t > it doesn't look like it could do any harm. Ah, I missed that fact. Yep, looks fine to me. J=C3=B6rn --=20 Joern's library part 7: http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/neworl/full_pape= rs/mckusick.a