[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F450C5F.7080309@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:40:15 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
davem@...emloft.net, ddaney.cavm@...il.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups
+ docs
On 02/22/2012 07:19 AM, Jason Baron wrote:
>
> Right, we've discussed an 'unbiased' variant a bit before, but I don't
> have a working imlementation for it yet. But I agree all current users are of
> the biased variety.
>
> Also, decoupling the higher level interfaces, as Ingo has suggested -
> 'very_unlikely' 'static_key', from the lower level 'jump label' naming makes
> sense. We might eventually add an 'unbias' variant. Another potential variant
> is in the 'bias' case is to move the mostly not taken branch even further out
> of line. Another possibilty is a 'switch'-like variant or multi-way jump.
>
Okay, at least we need something to connect the readout with the key,
otherwise there is nothing that even hints that they are part of the
same fundamental subsystem...
I don't know if key_likely() and key_unlikely() would make sense...
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists