[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121120.135409.1810847883436963918.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:54:09 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: paolo.valente@...more.it
Cc: jhs@...atatu.com, shemminger@...tta.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
rizzo@....unipi.it, fchecconi@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: QFQ Plus: fair-queueing service at DRR cost
From: Paolo Valente <paolo.valente@...more.it>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 18:45:13 +0100
> - struct sk_buff *skb;
> + struct sk_buff *skb = NULL;
This is not really an improvement, now the compiler can think
that NULL is passed eventually into qdisc_bstats_update().
Please make the logic easier for the compiler to digest.
For example, restructure the top-level logic into something like:
skb = NULL;
if (!list_empty(&in_serv_agg->active))
skb = qfq_peek_skb(in_serv_agg, &cl, &len);
else
len = 0; /* no more active classes in the in-service agg */
if (len == 0 || in_serv_agg->budget < len) {
...
/*
* If we get here, there are other aggregates queued:
* choose the new aggregate to serve.
*/
in_serv_agg = q->in_serv_agg = qfq_choose_next_agg(q);
skb = qfq_peek_skb(in_serv_agg, &cl, &len);
}
if (!skb)
return NULL;
That way it is clearer, to both humans and the compiler, what is
going on here.
Thanks.
--
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