[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140519232531.GJ19657@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 16:25:31 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] ixgbe: Out of line ixgbe_read/write_reg
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:00:52PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote:
> On May 16, 2014, at 2:43 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
>
> > From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> >
> > ixgbe_read_reg and ixgbe_write_reg are frequently called and are very big
> > because they have complex error handling code.
>
> Actually, this patch doesn't do anything to ixgbe_write_reg, which would almost certainly be very bad for performance, but instead changes ixgbe_write_reg64.
I doubt a few cycles around the write make a lot of difference for MMIO. MMIO is dominated
by other things.
> The latter is not in a performance-sensitive path, but is only called from one site, so there is little reason to take it out-of-line.
True I moved the wrong one.
ixgbe_write_reg 3305 (0.00%) 8 409
> I already have a patch in queue to make ixgbe_read_reg out-of-line, because it does have a very costly memory footprint inline, as you have found.
Please move write_reg too.
-Andi
--
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