Re: [PATCH 10/25] Unionfs: add un/likely conditionals on copyup ops

[Erez Zadok]

In message <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709261845110.7066@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Engelhardt writes:
> 
> On Sep 26 2007 11:43, Erez Zadok wrote:
> >
> >*That's* the information I was looking for, Kyle: what's the estimated
> >probability I should be using as my guideline.  I used 95% (20/1 ratio), and
> 
> ;-)
> 
> 19:1 <=> 95:5 <=> 95% <=> ratio=0.95  != 20.0 (=20/1)
> 
> >you're telling me I should use 99% (100/1 ratio).  The difference between
> 
> 99:1 <=> 99% <=> ratio=0.99  != 100.0 (=100/1)
> 
> >the number of cycles saved/added is very compelling.  Given that I certainly
> >agree with you that I'm using un/likely too much.  I'll re-evaluate and
> >update my patch series then.

Yeah, close enough. :-)

The important issue is that I'm probably using about five times too many
un/likely wrappers.

Erez.
-
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/