From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B093A20D13 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 22:08:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751116AbdFAWI0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2017 18:08:26 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:36155 "EHLO mail-pf0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751078AbdFAWIZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2017 18:08:25 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f174.google.com with SMTP id m17so38682732pfg.3 for ; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 15:08:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GCA44/j2N9sb27BthAQWsZJnDLGG5fA/aOujrEm7rds=; b=nBG18EMy0peYfJMIv/C4vBs2J/Qc2EvcHdP/0rjLRmHWWQgcgWnRgP1JAH1foPnRYf O1dbNz1xUOExIQEykJF5rVKn0piSCEjpxV18QLN6DaBpclzBrXLVIebljN+1VkLk/udX sxwZoj7U+Md5zU0YR6eZYNZK0GoIKjQqMJDzVnSFKerXFCSXcndCq7taPuBUCQL6k9eN xVesrnoPXGzX912+vcNRZXkr5FguL9vIMmUBDdvPXzyiHydyXTckUihXljDvihu4o6s5 nKWAOSpMuXGqqY4JovZk6XS2V1xZHED19QD5FXA0w1kUcGzmdo8ZQ/MN7Pjfh/PUoFvp y68g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GCA44/j2N9sb27BthAQWsZJnDLGG5fA/aOujrEm7rds=; b=sZ5LgKcMU1jORuQIDDuNA0RUJsnJ/cHJ8bvLyBxu/OJgg3Z+lpxKiOzZ8ov5aIUoI+ tSEikdioPqwHNp/ZbChbqMzG0GaS7ocwnhAF5yG5y/jjSSuhqZrSXY9wKs5GE4Z51py2 Dl4KaDpqzgES0GeGxhZnOnYLPVOZJmCvf3SsKW7OJYZCMW5qbN13RGf+2eM2/Oq4ABwX KgevOhjIJJGOQm95v9e1L4dzc00pVqU9sEJRzcVqiHftWmG3r3o3cr0IHMOfXkFFgPKz JeLzjln1SgJYVirp73/1Ko8un26epVa5nSb5KjbYZY0BUvF7PFD9CN9zpI8o0++btUIm OWMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBLM/ePfscN+Nlf0umiPPO6yPzR7KoOsQPz/XtBBdG5eRN1iFg/ JI0lD4AqGTkoPr2hN4Qsggq75s8dBhus X-Received: by 10.84.174.3 with SMTP id q3mr39326153plb.52.1496354905105; Thu, 01 Jun 2017 15:08:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.170.200 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Jun 2017 15:08:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20170601182056.31142-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20170601182056.31142-3-avarab@gmail.com> From: Stefan Beller Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 15:08:24 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] grep: skip pthreads overhead when using one thread To: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" , Junio C Hamano , Jeff King , Jeffrey Walton , =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Kiedrowicz?= , J Smith , Victor Leschuk , =?UTF-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41jIER1eQ==?= , Fredrik Kuivinen , Brandon Williams , Johannes Schindelin Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:55 PM, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason wrote: > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Stefan Beller wrote= : >>> I didn't mean to change this bit, it should remain "if >>> (!num_threads)". I was in the middle of monkeypatching and didn't >>> review the diff carefully enough. But it any case, without this change >>> the rest of this diff is your proposed (but segfaulting) change as I >>> understand it. >> >> Sorry for the proposing a sloppy alternative. (I missed one occurrence >> of num_threads used in a conditional). >> I think the original is still better than littering comments everywhere. > > I should have said: None of these follow-up diffs of mine (including > the added comments) are something I think should be applied, I just > inlined that to explain the code in context. ok, cool. :) > > Just to make 100% sure I understand you, do you mean you think the > original v4 version I posted here makes sense with that explanation or > do you have other outstanding concerns? Well as I said in the first message, I would have tried a different approac= h for this patch as I'd find that easier to understand. (Not sure what exactl= y is missing there to make it work). But the version v4 is fine with me, too, no other outstanding concerns.