Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] dma-iommu: use static-key to minimize the impact in the fast-path

[Robin Murphy]

On 2021-01-19 15:26, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:16:15PM +0800, Lianbo Jiang wrote:
> > +static DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(__deferred_attach);
>
> Why the strange underscores?  Wouldn't iommu_deferred_attach_enabled
> be a better name?
>
> > -	if (unlikely(iommu_dma_deferred_attach(dev, domain)))
> > +	if (static_branch_unlikely(&__deferred_attach) &&
> > +	    iommu_dma_deferred_attach(dev, domain))
>
> Also insted of duplicating this logic in three places, maybe rename
> iommu_dma_deferred_attach to __iommu_dma_deferred_attach and create
> a small inline wrapper for it?

Once patch #2 is in place, I really don't see any point. The "helper" 
would add a minimum of 5 lines to save at most 3, and would have to be 
annotated as always_inline - which a whole other camp of people would 
probably object to - in order for the static branch to be properly useful.

It's not as if this is a complex or hard-to-read expression, so IMO 
having 3 lines repeated 3 times is objectively better than having 2 
lines necessarily repeated 3 times plus having to scroll up and find 
several more lines to follow what it's doing.

Robin.