From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kris Katterjohn" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Merge __load_pointer() and load_pointer() in net/core/filter.c; kernel 2.6.14 Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 18:13:47 -0800 Message-ID: <310a17ad00f84c389e64ae26656ce1a1.kjak@ispwest.com> Reply-To: "Kris Katterjohn" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: jschlst@samba.org, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, acme@ghostprotocols.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: "Herbert Xu" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org I wasn't actually changing it to add performance, but to make the code look cleaner. The new load_pointer() is virtually the same as having the seperate functions that are currently there, but the code, I think, is "better looking". If you look at the current net/core/filter.c and then my patched version, the steps are done in the exact same order and same way, but all in that one function. That may sound silly, but I just kept looking at it and asking myself, "Why?" Of course, one way may still out-perform the other. Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: Herbert Xu [mailto:herbert@gondor.apana.org.au] Sent: 11/2/2005 5:50:29 PM To: kjak@users.sourceforge.net Cc: jschlst@samba.org; torvalds@osdl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; davem@davemloft.net; acme@ghostprotocols.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Merge __load_pointer() and load_pointer() in net/core/filter.c; kernel 2.6.14 > Kris Katterjohn wrote: > > Another patch for net/core/filter.c by me. I merged __load_pointer() into > > load_pointer(). I don't see a point in having two seperate functions when > > both functions are really small and load_pointer() calls __load_pointer(). > > Renamed the variable "k" to "offset" since that's what it is, and in > > skb_header_pointer() it's "offset". > > > > This patch is a diff from kernel 2.6.14 > > This code path is performance-critical so you should benchmark your > changes. > > In this particular case, __load_pointer is the unlikely case and > therefore it wasn't inlined. > > Cheers, > -- > Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ > Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} > Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ > PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt