Re: [PATCH -mm] add some unlikely() to fs/select.c

On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 07:54:47PM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Add unlikely() to various core select() and poll() functions.

> Since these functions show up as X server related during profiling
> (which is quite obvious), I thought that adding some unlikely()
> shouldn't hurt...

Have you done any benchmarking? micro-benchmarking?

> I also moved some error code setting into error path (please yell if
> I shouldn't do that).

FWIW, unlikely part makes no difference whatsoever with my usual config
and gcc-3.4.6. Messing with error codes makes .o slightly bigger:

text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
4483       0       0    4483    1183 fs/select.o
4490       0       0    4490    118a fs/select.o
------------------------------------
			  +7

And don't mix several things in one patch.

-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH -mm] add some unlikely() to fs/select.c
    • From: Andreas Mohr <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: peculiar suspend/resume bug.
• Next by Date: [-mm patch] hdaps: Add explicit hardware configuration functions - fix
• Previous by thread: [PATCH -mm] add some unlikely() to fs/select.c
• Next by thread: Maximum number of processes in Linux
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]