From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754816Ab1LBMIa (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Dec 2011 07:08:30 -0500 Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:34884 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754341Ab1LBMI2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Dec 2011 07:08:28 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 689 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 02 Dec 2011 07:08:28 EST Message-ID: <4ED8BD00.4000500@trash.net> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 12:56:48 +0100 From: Patrick McHardy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111114 Icedove/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Alex,Shi" CC: Eric Dumazet , Christoph Lameter , "tj@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Huang, Ying" , Thomas Gleixner , "mingo@redhat.com" , "avi@redhat.com" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , David Miller , "a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "jeremy@xensource.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net: use this_cpu_xxx replace percpu_xxx funcs References: <1318237851.27949.190.camel@debian> <1318324774.27949.693.camel@debian> <1318382964.27949.782.camel@debian> <1318428673.29699.13.camel@debian> <1318908091.23426.52.camel@debian> <1319016218.23426.104.camel@debian> <1319078687.23426.146.camel@debian> <1319087281.8416.45.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1319095929.23426.180.camel@debian> <1319099893.3781.0.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> <1321866051.30341.565.camel@debian> <1322793200.11530.33.camel@debian> In-Reply-To: <1322793200.11530.33.camel@debian> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02.12.2011 03:33, Alex,Shi wrote: > On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 17:00 +0800, Alex,Shi wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 16:38 +0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: >>> Le jeudi 20 octobre 2011 à 15:32 +0800, Alex,Shi a écrit : >>>> percpu_xxx funcs are duplicated with this_cpu_xxx funcs, so replace them >>>> for further code clean up. >>>> >>>> And in preempt safe scenario, __this_cpu_xxx funcs has a bit better >>>> performance since __this_cpu_xxx has no redundant preempt_disable() >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Shi >>>> --- >>>> net/netfilter/xt_TEE.c | 12 ++++++------ >>>> net/socket.c | 4 ++-- >>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >>> >>> Acked-by: Eric Dumazet >>> >>> Thanks ! >> >> Anyone like to pick up this patch? or more comments for this? > > Kaber, David: > I appreciate for your any comments on this. Could you like do me a > favor? No objections from me.