From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753855AbYKNDSm (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:18:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751232AbYKNDSd (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:18:33 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:39292 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751143AbYKNDSc (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:18:32 -0500 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:18:11 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Nick Piggin cc: Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [rfc] x86: optimise page fault path a little In-Reply-To: <20081114024347.GB24414@wotan.suse.de> Message-ID: References: <20081113072821.GB2946@wotan.suse.de> <20081114015817.GC5063@wotan.suse.de> <20081114024347.GB24414@wotan.suse.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > > I don't exactly know what you mean by random micro-optimization. It is > what it is. I like counting cachelines and branches and I thought you > did as well. You're missing the point. If you spent a bit more time on it, it would be a cleanup too, and we wouldn't need this discussion. As it is, it's a wash. At which point I'd simply rather not touch the code. You can have your cake and eat it too, and I tried to explain how. And I don't understand why you argue against it. Linus