From: Chris Snook <chris.snook@gmail.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@tglx.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
nikolag@ca.ibm.com, Darren Hart <dvhltc@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Introduce CLOCK_REALTIME_COARSE
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 23:00:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <13a12eea0907182000v654e38a5l265ae5bdadb1a175@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247873945.8334.67.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 7:39 PM, john stultz<johnstul@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> - if (likely(gtod->sysctl_enabled && gtod->clock.vread))
> + if (likely(gtod->sysctl_enabled))
This irks me. If the sysctl is enabled and the codepath is getting
used often enough that we care about performance, branch prediction
should do the right thing without compiler hints. On the other hand,
if the sysctl is disabled, and the compiler is telling the cpu to
ignore its branch predictor, it'll hurt. I don't think we should be
wrapping (un)likely annotations around configuration options, unless
we're biasing against debug conditions where we definitely don't care
about performance. The patch is certainly no worse than the existing
code, but while we have the hood up, it might be nice to remove the
annotation, unless we're sure that it does no harm, and does some
good.
-- Chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-19 3:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-17 23:39 john stultz
2009-07-18 8:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-07-18 22:09 ` john stultz
2009-07-18 22:30 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-07-20 11:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-20 12:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-07-20 13:33 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-07-20 13:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-07-22 21:39 ` Josh Triplett
2009-07-21 22:31 ` john stultz
2009-07-22 1:26 ` john stultz
2009-08-01 12:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2009-07-18 12:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-07-18 22:20 ` john stultz
2009-07-19 3:00 ` Chris Snook [this message]
2009-07-19 6:14 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-07-19 6:48 ` Nicholas Miell
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=13a12eea0907182000v654e38a5l265ae5bdadb1a175@mail.gmail.com \
--to=chris.snook@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nikolag@ca.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@tglx.de \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®