From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rps: optimize rps_get_cpu() Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:22:30 -0400 Message-ID: <1272126150.8918.20.camel@bigi> References: <1272122227-13070-1-git-send-email-xiaosuo@gmail.com> <1272125052.8918.18.camel@bigi> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , Tom Herbert , Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Changli Gao Return-path: Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com ([209.85.221.179]:63853 "EHLO mail-qy0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752525Ab0DXQWe (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:22:34 -0400 Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so14845851qyk.1 for ; Sat, 24 Apr 2010 09:22:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, 2010-04-25 at 00:19 +0800, Changli Gao wrote: > Maybe I have used the wrong word. Sorry. If the ports are already in > cache, the new code has only one cache access for ports, and the later > operations are in registers. Ok, that makes more sense - so your commit log is confusing. You are saving a shift operation per packet - probably not a big deal but better than zero ;-> cheers, jamal