From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A289B17C68; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.187 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733106054; cv=none; b=K/xbqW0wPEJV6QILV51QUVKtrFegCQZ4TAMZN51dGQf9/MD/4Osb8wAwmLHpQqMOn15ZuHstkB8CjgdM8zVHkjaIl0RUdyW0sk3YufUoXKY9RPbW+GzplQam+/zYF1RaurW9Nxepxw3pYFijSZXS1kCZUIi83tTewqy5adpRbis= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733106054; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Rl6VecOJp5P1Hz3Awfi+89uXY3PYZEYq4plD9zQaXWY=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=DEOvZArPWx/1lj7SE/dxDz5NM2IcRtMFnZ3LYJT/lqvLVZD3SYHCcuqs2YowO2kmik10cXolE44dXTLjMTUEclLKXvBuwX95/KLEadHFRaDkADJL2w+Eh+QXVOrWYoUR1uPXT5QCyoUmt1ADN93AZANmtNsbmA6vMiA3qC3MgJE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.187 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.162.254]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Y1nW21SBCzxWnG; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 10:17:50 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemf200001.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.181.227]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E43651800F2; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 10:20:43 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.110.54.32] (10.110.54.32) by kwepemf200001.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.227) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 10:20:42 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 10:20:41 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: Optimize the timing of unlocking in smc_listen_work To: Jakub Kicinski CC: , , , , , , , , , , References: <20241130082630.2007-1-liqiang64@huawei.com> <20241130110425.4610e6b6@kernel.org> From: Li Qiang In-Reply-To: <20241130110425.4610e6b6@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To kwepemf200001.china.huawei.com (7.202.181.227) 在 2024/12/1 3:04, Jakub Kicinski 写道: > On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 16:26:30 +0800 liqiang wrote: >> The optimized code is equivalent to the original process, and it releases the >> lock early. > > By a single clock cycle? You need to provide much more detailed > justification, otherwise this looks like churn for no real gain. I don't have any more information about this patch, I saw that the lock will be released regardless of branch true or false, so brought it forward. Thanks for your reply, Jakub! :) -- Cheers, Li Qiang