From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59009)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1UaobJ-0001LU-Fg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:47:18 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1UaobE-00036L-SU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:47:13 -0400
Message-ID: <518D0869.9020009@suse.de>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 16:47:05 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1368196799-19982-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<CAFEAcA8QHAUDL_rEUP_nuMEwNX_ZW5eXnY=SVKNL+fYAWkFZJg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8QHAUDL_rEUP_nuMEwNX_ZW5eXnY=SVKNL+fYAWkFZJg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-1.5?] target-ppc: Drop unnecessary
 dynamic cast in ppc_env_get_cpu()
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, PowerPC <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, pbonzini@redhat.com, aurelien@aurel32.net

Am 10.05.2013 16:42, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> On 10 May 2013 15:39, Andreas F=C3=A4rber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
>> A transition from CPUPPCState to PowerPCCPU can be considered safe,
>> just like PowerPCCPU::env access in the opposite direction.
>>
>> This should slightly improve interrupt performance.
>=20
>>  static inline PowerPCCPU *ppc_env_get_cpu(CPUPPCState *env)
>>  {
>> -    return POWERPC_CPU(container_of(env, PowerPCCPU, env));
>> +    return container_of(env, PowerPCCPU, env);
>>  }
>=20
> So if this is worthwhile shouldn't we be doing it for
> all our CPUs?

I thought ppc were the exception, but you're right there's 15
occurrences remaining, i.e. all targets do it that way currently.

Don't have time right now for large cross-tree cleanups, so feel free to
profile with and without this patch.

Andreas

--=20
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=C3=BC=
rnberg