On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:36:30AM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Jarek Poplawski wrote:

quoted

quoted

I think Oleg already said this, but you can use directly poll_wait() 
without adding another abstraction, and the compiler will drop the double 
check for you:

I think Oleg told about cosmetics and let Jiri to choose. I'd only
add it's not mainly about optimization, but easy showing the main
difference, of course depending on taste.

We already have a universally used function to do that, and that's 
poll_wait().
That code (adding an extra __poll_wait()) was entirely about 
optimizations (otherwise why not use the existing poll_wait()?), so if 
the optimization does not actually take place, IMO it's better to not add 
an extra API.

OK, you're right, it is about optimization! But IMHO mainly about
reading optimization... I simply guess me and probably Jiri too,
after reading Oleg's variant thought about compiler, instead of the
real difference.

Btw., maybe I miss something but I guess Oleg proposed something in
between: inlining __poll_wait(), which would save us 'extra API' and
compiler doubts. (But I still prefer Jiri's choice. ;-)

Jarek P.