On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Anton Altaparmakov <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 7 Nov 2014, at 01:46, Jeff Moyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Minor nit, but I'd rather read something that looks like this: > > > > if (type == READ && (flags & RWF_NONBLOCK)) > > return -EAGAIN; > > else if (type == WRITE && (flags & RWF_DSYNC)) > > return -EINVAL; > > But your version is less logically efficient for the case where "type == > READ" is true and "flags & RWF_NONBLOCK" is false because your version then > has to do the "if (type == WRITE" check before discovering it does not need > to take that branch either, whilst the original version does not have to do > such a test at all. > Seriously? Just focus on the code readability/maintainability which makes the code most easily understood/obvious to a new pair of eyes, and leave such micro-optimizations to the compiler.. Thanks
_______________________________________________ Ocfs2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
