From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: More prefetch fall-out Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 18:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20110522.181503.1446789103624635529.davem@davemloft.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([198.137.202.13]:54156 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755512Ab1EVWPM (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 May 2011 18:15:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 10:49:11 -0700 > However, one of the breakages is that does its own > list-walking functions ("skb_queue_walk*"), and they do prefetching. > So now I have the option to either just add to that > file, or remove the prefetches. And you're the one that said that the > prefetches in the networking code were annoying. > > So should the skb queues use prefetching? I have a hard time judging. > Are those lists usually long? Is the loop usually large enough that > there is any point to prefetching the next entry? Please just remove the prefetches. Those are modelled after list.h as I intend to eventually convert SKB list handling to "struct list_head" but we're not there yet. Therefore if we kill prefetches from list.h we should kill it from these things in skbuff.h too. Thanks!