From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: [rfc] bridge: is PACKET_LOOPBACK unlikely()? Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:35:32 +0900 Message-ID: <20100823033532.GA28463@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jiri Pirko , Stephen Hemminger , Jesse Gross To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org Return-path: Received: from kirsty.vergenet.net ([202.4.237.240]:59272 "EHLO kirsty.vergenet.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752909Ab0HWDfh (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Aug 2010 23:35:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: While looking at using netdev_rx_handler_register for openvswitch Jesse Gross suggested that an unlikely() might be worthwhile in that code. I'm interested to see if its appropriate for the bridge code. Cc: Jesse Gross Signed-off-by: Simon Horman Index: net-next-2.6/net/bridge/br_input.c =================================================================== --- net-next-2.6.orig/net/bridge/br_input.c 2010-08-23 12:17:58.000000000 +0900 +++ net-next-2.6/net/bridge/br_input.c 2010-08-23 12:19:46.000000000 +0900 @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ struct sk_buff *br_handle_frame(struct s const unsigned char *dest = eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest; int (*rhook)(struct sk_buff *skb); - if (skb->pkt_type == PACKET_LOOPBACK) + if (unlikely(skb->pkt_type == PACKET_LOOPBACK)) return skb; if (!is_valid_ether_addr(eth_hdr(skb)->h_source))