Re: [PATCH 1/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance

[Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>]

Harald Welte a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 11:29:13PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> > Patch 1/3
> >
> > 1) No more one rwlock_t protecting the 'curtain'
>
>
> I have no problem with this change "per se", but with the
> implementation.
>
> As of now, we live without any ugly #ifdef CONFIG_SMP / #endif sections
> in the code - and if possible, I would continue this good tradition.
>
> For example the get_counters() function.  Wouldn't all the smp specific
> code (for_each_cpu(), ...)  be #defined to nothing anyway?

Well... not exactly, but you are right only the first loop (SET_COUNTER) will 
really do something. The if (cpu == curcpu) will be true but the compiler wont 
 know that, cpu and curcpu are still C variables.


> And if we really need the #ifdef's, I would appreciate if those
> sectionas are as small as possible.  in get_counters() the section can
> definitely be smaller, rather than basically having the whole function
> body separate for smp and non-smp cases.

get_counters() is not critical, so I agree with you we can stick the general 
version (not the UP optimized one)

> Also, how much would we loose in runtime performance if we were using a
> "rwlock_t *" even in the UP case?.  I mean, it's just one more pointer
> dereference of something that is expected to be in cache anyway, isn't
> it?  This gets rid of another huge set of #ifdefs that make the code
> unreadable and prone to errors being introduced later on.

Well, in UP case, the rwlock_t is a nulldef.

I was inspired by another use of percpu data in include/linux/genhd.h
#ifdef  CONFIG_SMP
    struct disk_stats *dkstats;
#else
    struct disk_stats dkstats;
#endif

But if you dislike this, we can use pointer for all cases.

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/