Re: [PATCH] 2.6.9 Use skb_padto() in drivers/net/8390.c

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>]

Alan Cox wrote:
> On Llu, 2005-01-10 at 02:41, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> 
>>Using rdtscl over the  area affected by the patch on the two variants for a
>>sample  of 234 small packets, I see an average of 4141 for using the
>>existing stack scratch area, and 4162 for using skb_padto.   That is a
>>difference of about 0.5%, which is significantly less than the typical
>>spread in the samples themselves.  To help give a relevant scale,  feeding
>>it a larger 1400 byte packet comes in at around 60,000 cycles on this
>>particular box.   Am I being optimistic to see this as good news -- meaning
>>that there is no longer a need for driver specific padto implementations,
>>whereas it looks like there was back when you did your tests? 
> 
> 
> It means that padto has improved a lot (or the underlying allocators).
> It also still means the patch makes the code slower and introduces
> changes that have no benefit into the kernel, so while its good to see
> its not relevant its still a pointless change.

So the verdict is to revert?

	Jeff