From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] KVM: s390: use switch vs jump table in interrupt.c
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 10:53:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c50299e3-0516-b590-1fee-25dbc8189830@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180208091405.397e9178.cohuck@redhat.com>
On 02/08/2018 09:14 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 19:28:04 +0100
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> I see a minimal regression for uperf 1byte ping pong between two guests (~3%)
>> Probably because the old code first handled IO interrupts and then did the remaing
>> stuff. Not sure if its worth to keep the old io_ioirq hack.
>
> Hm, that confuses me a bit. We search the pending bit map, which should
> give us the irq with the highest priority, and the switch/case still
> starts out with I/O interrupts.
gcc does not obey the order of the case statements. It uses several heuristics depending
on the size and others. So gcc might fall back to jump tables for large switches, or
it uses bisecting or it might even split the search into a jump table and several
relative branches if there are strange distributions. Quite often the default
case is evaulated first.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-08 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-06 14:17 [PATCH v1] KVM: s390: use switch vs jump table in interrupt.c David Hildenbrand
2018-02-06 14:29 ` Cornelia Huck
2018-02-07 18:28 ` Christian Borntraeger
2018-02-08 8:14 ` Cornelia Huck
2018-02-08 9:53 ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2018-02-08 10:00 ` Cornelia Huck
2018-02-08 10:04 ` Christian Borntraeger
2018-02-08 8:23 ` Janosch Frank
2018-02-08 10:29 ` Christian Borntraeger
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=c50299e3-0516-b590-1fee-25dbc8189830@de.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox