mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, matthew@wil.cx, rth@twiddle.net
Subject: Re: When should we use likely() / unlikely() / get_unaligned() ?
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 21:43:35 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040208214335.58f351d4.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1076065578.16147.72.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com>

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 11:06:19 +0000
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:

> There seems to be no coherent answer to the above questions. On some
> architectures likely() might bypass dynamic branch prediction, so we
> shouldn't use it unless there's at _least_ a 95% probability; on others
> it may simply affect code ordering and we gain a tiny benefit from it if
> the probabilities aren't precisely 50/50.

Yes, agreed.  But many unlikely() macros are simply there because gcc isn't
smart enough yet:

eg. fs/read_write.c:

		if (unlikely(put_user(pos, offset)))
			return -EFAULT;

It'd be better to have gcc know that this function was unlikely to return
a -ve value, and derive all the error paths itself.

It'd also be nice to be able to mark eg. printk() and BUG() as fundamentally
unlikely.

Sometimes, unlikely()/likely() help code readability.  But generally it
should be considered the register keyword of the 2000's: if the case isn't
ABSOLUTELY CRYSTAL CLEAR, or doesn't show up on benchmarks, distain is
appropriate.

Cheers,
Rusty.
-- 
   there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too
   many doers quoting their contemporaries.  -- Larry McVoy

  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-08 10:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-06 11:06 David Woodhouse
2004-02-08 10:43 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2004-02-08 11:13   ` David Woodhouse
2004-02-08 23:00     ` Rusty Russell
2004-02-08 23:06       ` David Woodhouse
2004-02-08 23:11       ` David S. Miller
2004-02-08 23:14         ` David Woodhouse
2004-02-16 11:39     ` Pavel Machek

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=20040208214335.58f351d4.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    /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®