From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zach Brown Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the vfs tree with the aio-direct tree Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 10:06:30 -0700 Message-ID: <20130918170630.GA2103@lenny.msi.event> References: <20130918105638.6fa7c29605c14b408b7f5a7e@canb.auug.org.au> <20130918020035.GK13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34018 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753302Ab3IRRGk (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:06:40 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130918020035.GK13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Al Viro Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Kleikamp > As for aio-direct... Two questions: > * had anybody tried to measure the effect on branch predictor from > introducing that method vector? Commit d6afd4c4 ("iov_iter: hide iovec > details behind ops function pointers") FWIW, I never did. I only went that route to begin with because the few alternatives I tried before that were even more ugly :(. It's been long enough that I can't quite remember what I'd tried, though. - z