From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261538AbVGCVRp (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:17:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261542AbVGCVRp (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:17:45 -0400 Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:19913 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261538AbVGCVRm (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:17:42 -0400 Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 23:17:32 +0200 From: Kurt Garloff To: James Morris Cc: Linux kernel list , Chris Wright , Stephen Smalley , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Steve Beattie , linux-security-module@wirex.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Use conditional Message-ID: <20050703211732.GG11093@tpkurt.garloff.de> Mail-Followup-To: Kurt Garloff , James Morris , Linux kernel list , Chris Wright , Stephen Smalley , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Steve Beattie , linux-security-module@wirex.com References: <20050703154405.GE11093@tpkurt.garloff.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aziWXe2aaRGlkyg3" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.11.4-21.7-default i686 X-PGP-Info: on http://www.garloff.de/kurt/mykeys.pgp X-PGP-Key: 1024D/1C98774E Organization: SUSE/Novell User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --aziWXe2aaRGlkyg3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi James, [added linux-security-module@wirex.com to Cc] On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 12:51:20PM -0400, James Morris wrote: > On Sun, 3 Jul 2005, Kurt Garloff wrote: >=20 > > capablities is used. These are not called via indirect calls but=20 > > called as hardcoded calls and might thus be inlined; the price for > > this is a conditional -- benchmarks done by hp showed this to be > > beneficial (on ia64). >=20 > What about on i386, x86_64 or ppc64? We tested on i386 as well at the time, and it looked like a tiny improvement. But doing the statistics, it was in the noise.=20 I have no numbers for x86_64 or ppc64. If you have reason to believe that there could be regressions, we=20 should indeed do the benchmarks. Sidenote: The patches 1 -- 2b alone still make sense, so I would vote not for delaying their inclusion until we can collect numbers for all arches we care about to take a decision on patch 3. Best, --=20 Kurt Garloff, Director SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. --aziWXe2aaRGlkyg3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCyFXsxmLh6hyYd04RArsBAJ463zK2WxP+dfRvkzb4DmbXIaDfVQCgk2VG I6Mt75PTIZ8OlydpgFcvvAE= =vpYh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aziWXe2aaRGlkyg3--