Re: [Patch 1/8] Setup

Balbir Singh <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> +static inline void delayacct_end(struct timespec *start, struct timespec *end,
> +				u64 *total, u32 *count)
> +{
> +	struct timespec ts = {0, 0};
> +	s64 ns;
> +
> +	do_posix_clock_monotonic_gettime(end);
> +	timespec_sub(&ts, start, end);
> +	ns = timespec_to_ns(&ts);
> +	if (ns < 0)
> +		return;
> +
> +	spin_lock(&current->delays->lock);
> +	*total += ns;
> +	(*count)++;
> +	spin_unlock(&current->delays->lock);
> +}

- too large to be inlined

- The initialisation of `ts' is unneeded (maybe it generated a bogus
  warning, but it won't do that if you switch timespec_sub to
  return-by-value)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • [PATCH][delayacct] un-inline delayacct_end(), remove initialization of ts (was Re: [Patch 1/8] Setup)
    • From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>
  • Re: [Patch 1/8] Setup
    • From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [Patch 1/8] Setup
    • From: Balbir Singh <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Patch 2/8] Sync block I/O and swapin delay collection
• Next by Date: Re: + two-additions-to-linux-documentation-ioctl-numbertxt.patch added to -mm tree
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH][delayacct] Fix the timespec_sub() interface (was Re: [Patch 1/8] Setup)
• Next by thread: Re: [Patch 1/8] Setup
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]