[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1331242079.2592.4.camel@offbook>
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 22:27:59 +0100
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@....org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86: add paging gcc optimization
On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 16:47 +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 08/03/12 12:45, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@....org>
> >
> > Since most guests will have paging enabled for memory management, add likely() optimization
> > around CR0.PG checks.
>
> > {
> > - return kvm_read_cr0_bits(vcpu, X86_CR0_PG);
> > + return likely(kvm_read_cr0_bits(vcpu, X86_CR0_PG));
>
>
> IMHO likely/unlikely should be considered more as fast-path/slow-path and not as often/less often.
> Is that the case here? This patch might cause a mis-prediction for non-paging guests all
> the time.
Branch predictions are all about probability of occurrence, and I cannot
imagine guests having paging disabled and mapping gva->gpa directly, so
for most of the cases it would be beneficial. For those peculiar users
that actually don't use paging, then yes, mispredictions would occur.
- Davidlohr
>
> Non-paging might be really irrelevant, so I am just making a point, since
> likely/unlikely is mis-used too often especially for "most users do it that way".
>
>
> Christian
>
>
--
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