From: Christian Borntraeger <borntrae...@de.ibm.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2018 7:16 PM > >> So you are trading of a load + add (dev_info->start should be cache hot) > >> against a > >> compare+branch . Not sure that this is always a win. > > > > Hmm...the calculation process of pfn is more complicated than kaddr. I > > think you agree to > check pfn but not sure kaddr, right? > > From the logical consistency of code, I think it shall be better to give > > pfn and kaddr similar > treatment. > > Reading it again, its more that I do not like the patch description. It reads > like an optimization, (and I think it is not) but it should rather read more > like "with an upcoming change kaddr can be NULL" or so.
Thanks for suggestion, I will reword the patch description during next submission. Does the patch itself need to be modified? If has, any suggestion is welcome. Cheers, Huaisheng Ye _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
