From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/17] vmx: nest: VMExit handler in L2
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 16:34:51 +0100
Message-ID: <20100525153451.GC15976@whitby.uk.xensource.com>
References: <1271929289-18572-1-git-send-email-qing.he@intel.com>
	<1271929289-18572-11-git-send-email-qing.he@intel.com>
	<20100520114414.GQ4164@whitby.uk.xensource.com>
	<20100520160606.GD21538@qhe2-db>
	<20100521084215.GV4164@whitby.uk.xensource.com>
	<20100521103523.GD21018@qhe2-db>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100521103523.GD21018@qhe2-db>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Qing He <qing.he@intel.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

At 11:35 +0100 on 21 May (1274441723), Qing He wrote:
> > I understand that.  It just seems inefficient to bundle them all
> > together into one clause of the switch statement and then scan an array
> > looking for which one you've hit.  Wouldn't it be better to give each
> > one its own clause and then use goto (!) or similar to jump to the
> > common code?
> 
> Ok, I'll change it to switch clauses, does it mean to be more friendly to
> the compiler?

No, it's just faster; I don't think GCC can optimize out a while loop,
even scanning a static array with a known limited set of possible inputs
(though i would be delighted to hear otherwise).

Just to be clear, I'm talking about replacing this kind of logic

switch (x) {
case a: 
case b:
case c: 
  for (i = o; i < 3 ; i++)
     if ( x == array[i] ) 
         /* do case-specific thing */
  /* do common case */ 
}

with this equivalent:

switch (x) {
case a: 
     /* do a-specific thing */
     goto common;
case b:
     /* do b-specific thing */
     goto common;
case c: 
     /* do c-specific thing */
     goto common;
common:
  /* do common case */ 
}


Cheers,

Tim.

-- 
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@citrix.com>
Principal Software Engineer, XenServer Engineering
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)