From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
To: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@freescale.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] gianfar: GRO_DROP is unlikely
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:30:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130212163056.GA1000@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1360673237-349-3-git-send-email-claudiu.manoil@freescale.com>
[[PATCH net-next 3/5] gianfar: GRO_DROP is unlikely] On 12/02/2013 (Tue 14:47) Claudiu Manoil wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@freescale.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
> index 096fb5f..5622134 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
> @@ -2745,7 +2745,7 @@ static int gfar_process_frame(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb,
> /* Send the packet up the stack */
> ret = napi_gro_receive(napi, skb);
>
> - if (GRO_DROP == ret)
> + if (unlikely(GRO_DROP == ret))
> priv->extra_stats.kernel_dropped++;
>
> return 0;
I wondered about this, specifically if it was a moot point, when the
actual unlikely was deployed right at the end of the fcn. It turns out
that it does make a difference, since gfar_process_frame gets inlined,
and so the increment code gets moved out of line (I have marked the if
statment with * and the increment code within "-----"):
------------------------- as is currently ------------------
4d14: 80 61 00 18 lwz r3,24(r1)
4d18: 7f c4 f3 78 mr r4,r30
4d1c: 48 00 00 01 bl 4d1c <gfar_clean_rx_ring+0x10c>
* 4d20: 2f 83 00 04 cmpwi cr7,r3,4
4d24: 40 9e 00 1c bne- cr7,4d40 <gfar_clean_rx_ring+0x130>
----------------------------
4d28: 81 3c 01 f8 lwz r9,504(r28)
4d2c: 81 5c 01 fc lwz r10,508(r28)
4d30: 31 4a 00 01 addic r10,r10,1
4d34: 7d 29 01 94 addze r9,r9
4d38: 91 3c 01 f8 stw r9,504(r28)
4d3c: 91 5c 01 fc stw r10,508(r28)
----------------------------
4d40: a0 1f 00 24 lhz r0,36(r31)
4d44: 81 3f 00 00 lwz r9,0(r31)
4d48: 7f a4 eb 78 mr r4,r29
4d4c: 7f e3 fb 78 mr r3,r31
-------------------------- unlikely ------------------------
4d14: 80 61 00 18 lwz r3,24(r1)
4d18: 7f c4 f3 78 mr r4,r30
4d1c: 48 00 00 01 bl 4d1c <gfar_clean_rx_ring+0x10c>
* 4d20: 2f 83 00 04 cmpwi cr7,r3,4
4d24: 41 9e 03 94 beq- cr7,50b8 <gfar_clean_rx_ring+0x4a8>
4d28: a0 1f 00 24 lhz r0,36(r31)
4d2c: 81 3f 00 00 lwz r9,0(r31)
4d30: 7f a4 eb 78 mr r4,r29
4d34: 7f e3 fb 78 mr r3,r31
[...]
50b8: 81 3c 01 f8 lwz r9,504(r28)
50bc: 81 5c 01 fc lwz r10,508(r28)
50c0: 31 4a 00 01 addic r10,r10,1
50c4: 7d 29 01 94 addze r9,r9
50c8: 91 3c 01 f8 stw r9,504(r28)
50cc: 91 5c 01 fc stw r10,508(r28)
50d0: 4b ff fc 58 b 4d28 <gfar_clean_rx_ring+0x118>
So, the increment does actually get moved ~1k away. Maybe you can
incorporate the above information in your long log, so the next guy
doesn't wonder about the same question I did.
Also, I noticed that gfar_process_frame() can be void instead of int.
It never returns anything but zero, and the return code is ignored at
the single call site. Maybe you can add a patch to your series for that
as well?
Paul.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-12 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-12 12:47 [PATCH net-next 1/5] gianfar: Cleanup device refs in gfar_private Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 12:47 ` [PATCH net-next 2/5] gianfar: Cleanup and optimize struct gfar_private Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 12:47 ` [PATCH net-next 3/5] gianfar: GRO_DROP is unlikely Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 12:47 ` [PATCH net-next 4/5] gianfar: Remove wrong buffer size conditioning to VLAN h/w offload Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 12:47 ` [PATCH net-next 5/5] gianfar: Fix and cleanup Rx FCB handling Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 17:19 ` Paul Gortmaker
2013-02-13 11:34 ` Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-13 14:32 ` Paul Gortmaker
2013-02-12 16:30 ` Paul Gortmaker [this message]
2013-02-12 16:47 ` [PATCH net-next 3/5] gianfar: GRO_DROP is unlikely Eric Dumazet
2013-02-12 17:05 ` Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 15:11 ` [PATCH net-next 2/5] gianfar: Cleanup and optimize struct gfar_private Paul Gortmaker
2013-02-12 15:58 ` Claudiu Manoil
2013-02-12 16:49 ` Paul Gortmaker
2013-02-12 14:54 ` [PATCH net-next 1/5] gianfar: Cleanup device refs in gfar_private Paul Gortmaker
2013-02-12 17:14 ` Claudiu Manoil
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=20130212163056.GA1000@windriver.com \
--to=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=claudiu.manoil@freescale.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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.