On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 09:51:49AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > - }
> > - }
> > + if (unlikely((task_thread_info(next_p)->flags & _TIF_WORK_CTXSW))
> > + || test_tsk_thread_flag(prev_p, TIF_IO_BITMAP))
> > + __switch_to_xtra(prev_p, next_p, tss);
>
> well isn't this replacing an if() (which isn't cheap but also not
> expensive, due to unlikely()) with an atomic operation (which *is*
> expensive) ?
>
> That to me doesn't make this sound like an actual win....
>
Although the two if were marked unlikely, you had to do the test anyway.
So you had to touch next->debugreg[7], next->io_bitmap_ptr, and prev->io_bitmap_ptr.
Now the first two are collapsed into one cache line in thread_info->flags.
Yet, I see your point about the test_tsk_thread_flag() and I am wondering if we
do need the atomicity in this case and whether we could simplify by using the
same expression as for next, i.e, task_thread_info(prev_p)->flags & TIF_IO_BITMAP?
--
-Stephane
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
