Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] arch, x86: pmem api for ensuring durability of persistent memory updates

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote:
> This mess with arch_ methods and an ops vecor is almost unreadable.
>
> What's the problem with having something like:
>
> pmem_foo()
> {
>         if (arch_has_pmem)              // or sync_pmem
>                 arch_pmem_foo();
>         generic_pmem_foo();
> }
>
> This adds a branch at runtime, but that shoudn't really be any slower
> than an indirect call on architectures that matter.

No doubt it's premature optimization, but it bothered me that we'll
end up calling cpuid perhaps multiple times every i/o.  If it's just a
readability concern I could wrap it in helpers.  Getting it upstream
is my primary concern at this point so I have no strong attachment to
the indirect calls if that's all that is preventing an ack.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/