From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] net: macb: Consolidate MACB_CAPS_ISR_CLEAR_ON_WRITE checks in IRQ handler
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:54:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260331195400.16bb697c@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260328-macb-irq-v1-2-7b3e622fb46c@gmail.com>
On Sat, 28 Mar 2026 18:17:46 +0800 Kevin Hao wrote:
> Currently, the MACB_CAPS_ISR_CLEAR_ON_WRITE flag is checked in every
> branch of the IRQ handler. This repeated evaluation is unnecessary.
> By consolidating the flag check, we eliminate redundant loads of
> bp->caps when TX and RX events occur simultaneously, a common scenario
> under high network throughput. Additionally, this optimization reduces
> the function size from 0x2e8 to 0x2c4.
feels a bit subjective TBH. An alternative improvement would be to
factor out the conditional to a helper:
static void macb_queue_isr_clear(bp, queue, mask)
{
if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_ISR_CLEAR_ON_WRITE)
queue_writel(queue, ISR, mask);
}
I'd like an ack one way or the other from someone before merging this
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-01 2:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-28 10:17 [PATCH net-next 0/4] net: macb: Remove dedicated IRQ handler for WoL Kevin Hao
2026-03-28 10:17 ` [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: macb: Replace open-coded implementation with napi_schedule() Kevin Hao
2026-03-28 10:17 ` [PATCH net-next 2/4] net: macb: Consolidate MACB_CAPS_ISR_CLEAR_ON_WRITE checks in IRQ handler Kevin Hao
2026-04-01 2:54 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-04-01 9:30 ` Kevin Hao
2026-04-01 11:49 ` Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-02 13:44 ` Kevin Hao
2026-03-28 10:17 ` [PATCH net-next 3/4] net: macb: Factor out the handling of non-hot IRQ events into a separate function Kevin Hao
2026-04-01 2:54 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-01 9:31 ` Kevin Hao
2026-03-28 10:17 ` [PATCH net-next 4/4] net: macb: Remove dedicated IRQ handler for WoL Kevin Hao
2026-04-01 2:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-01 9:32 ` Kevin Hao
2026-04-03 16:17 ` [PATCH net-next 0/4] " Simon Horman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260331195400.16bb697c@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=haokexin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.ferre@microchip.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.