From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] brlocks/lglocks: turn into functions
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 13:09:04 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sjfcfynb.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120420112149.GH25458@amd.local0.net>
On Fri, 20 Apr 2012 21:21:49 +1000, Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk> wrote:
> This still not merged?
No, I've been away. I've put it in -next for tomorrow, though I'm not
sure what the best way to get it to Linus next merge window.
> There is a reason, which is performance. Extra function call, but also
> IIRC the percpu accessor was not so fast doing it this way. Maybe
> that's improved...
>
> So what's the performance difference?
What benchmarks you usually run? Feel free to try it out and report
back; I only have small hardware here.
> >
> > Since there are at least two users it makes sense to share this code in a
> > library. This is also easier maintainable than a macro forest.
> >
> > This will also make it later possible to dynamically allocate lglocks and
> > also use them in modules (this would both still need some additional, but
> > now straightforward, code)
>
> Yes, but let's not do either of those things :)
>
> I was slightly crazy when committing that patch to the kernel, I'll
> admit. So if performance isn't significantly affected, then definitely.
> If it is... well, it's much easier to gain 1% performance by maintaining
> 100 self contained lines of hilarious code like this than to actually
> use your brain to improve somewhere else!
Cheers,
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-07 5:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-27 23:22 [PATCH] cpumask: fix lg_lock/br_lock Rusty Russell
2012-02-27 23:53 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-27 23:53 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-28 8:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-02-28 11:25 ` Andi Kleen
2012-02-28 12:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-02-28 21:27 ` Andrew Morton
2012-02-29 5:44 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-02-29 9:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-02-29 11:12 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 7:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-03-01 9:15 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 9:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-03-01 9:56 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:12 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:24 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:12 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:15 ` [PATCH 1/3] CPU hotplug: Fix issues with callback registration Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:27 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:15 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:16 ` [PATCH 2/3] CPU hotplug, arch/powerpc: Fix CPU hotplug " Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:28 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:16 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:18 ` [PATCH 3/3] CPU hotplug, arch/sparc: " Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:30 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-03-01 8:18 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2012-02-29 8:29 ` [PATCH] cpumask: fix lg_lock/br_lock Ingo Molnar
2012-02-29 8:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-02-29 9:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2012-02-28 11:24 ` Andi Kleen
2012-03-05 7:02 ` Rusty Russell
2012-03-05 7:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] lglock: remove online variants of lock Rusty Russell
2012-04-20 11:12 ` Nick Piggin
2012-03-05 7:04 ` [PATCH 2/3] brlocks/lglocks: API cleanups Rusty Russell
2012-03-05 7:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] brlocks/lglocks: turn into functions Rusty Russell
2012-04-20 11:21 ` Nick Piggin
2012-05-07 3:39 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2012-05-07 5:46 ` Al Viro
2012-05-08 3:59 ` [PATCH 1/3] lglock: remove online variants of lock Rusty Russell
2012-05-08 4:50 ` Al Viro
2012-05-08 6:12 ` Rusty Russell
2012-05-08 4:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] brlocks/lglocks: API cleanups Rusty Russell
2012-05-08 4:02 ` [PATCH 3/3] brlocks/lglocks: turn into functions Rusty Russell
2012-05-09 7:35 ` Nick Piggin
2012-05-09 7:35 ` Nick Piggin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87sjfcfynb.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@kernel.dk \
--cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.