Re: [patch 2/2] [PATCH] mm: Save soft-dirty bits on file pages

From: Cyrill Gorcunov
Date: Tue Aug 13 2013 - 11:37:22 EST

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 08:14:39AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/12/2013 10:02 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >
> > There is a case when you don't need a mask completely. And because this
> > pte conversion is on hot path and time critical I kept generated code
> > as it was (even if that lead to slightly less clear source code).
> >
> Does it actually matter, generated-code-wise, or is the compiler smart
> enough to figure it out? The reason I'm asking is because it makes the

gcc-4.7.2 is smart enough to suppress useless masking (ie ((1u << 31) - 1))
completely but I don't know if this can be assumed for all gcc series.

> code much harder to follow.

I see. OK, I'll try to prepare more readable macro helpers.

> The other thing is can we please pretty please call it something other
> than "frob"?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at