From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: yang.shi@windriver.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improvev netconsole support for RTL8139 NIC driver
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:39:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47E9C56F.2070508@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080325.203043.196469543.davem@davemloft.net>
David Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:14:03 -0400
>
>> David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
>>> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:23:24 -0400
>>>
>>>> This is bogus -- you should never need to slow down the hot path in such
>>>> a way.
>>> Slow down in what way? Even on x86 saving the flags is just
>>> about as expensive as a plain sti/cli.
>> Replacing spin_lock() [current 8139too.c] with spin_lock_irqsave()
>> results in a larger interrupt handler... more CPU instructions for the
>> same result.
>
> Jeff, please be realistic.
>
> These interrupt handlers about to do a PIO on a status register, which
> will consume on the order of a few hundred cpu cycles.
>
> Counting an I-cache line or two, or 18 cycles here or there,
> is immaterial by comparison.
I am being realistic... it's
* not needed
* increases code size
* increases number of CPU instructions executed
* not needed
Thus applying this consistency rule across N drivers needlessly
increases the code size of N drivers.
Mainly I see such a change as a violation of a basic Linux principle:
do what you must, and no more.
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-26 3:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-26 2:12 [PATCH] Improvev netconsole support for RTL8139 NIC driver yshi
2008-03-26 2:23 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-03-26 2:38 ` yshi
2008-03-26 2:42 ` David Miller
2008-03-26 2:52 ` yshi
2008-03-26 3:14 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-03-26 3:14 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-03-26 3:30 ` David Miller
2008-03-26 3:39 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2008-03-26 3:48 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-03-26 3:53 ` David Miller
2008-03-26 4:32 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47E9C56F.2070508@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yang.shi@windriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).