[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4762F2EC.2010201@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:17:32 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
To: Wang Chen <wangchen@...fujitsu.com>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sky2: rtnl_lock out of loop will be faster
Wang Chen wrote:
> [PATCH 4/4] [NETDEV] sky2: rtnl_lock out of loop will be faster
>
> Before this patch, it gets and releases the lock at each
> iteration of the loop. Changing unregister_netdev to
> unregister_netdevice and locking outside of the loop will
> be faster for this approach.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Chen <wangchen@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> sky2.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- linux-2.6.24.rc5.org/drivers/net/sky2.c 2007-12-12 10:19:43.000000000 +0800
> +++ linux-2.6.24.rc5/drivers/net/sky2.c 2007-12-12 15:23:37.000000000 +0800
> @@ -4270,8 +4270,10 @@ static void __devexit sky2_remove(struct
> del_timer_sync(&hw->watchdog_timer);
> cancel_work_sync(&hw->restart_work);
>
> + rtnl_lock();
> for (i = hw->ports-1; i >= 0; --i)
> - unregister_netdev(hw->dev[i]);
> + unregister_netdevice(hw->dev[i]);
> + rtnl_unlock();
while true and correct, I don't see the remove path as needing this type
of micro-optimization.
Removing and shutting down hardware is an operation that can take many
seconds (an eternity, to a computer)... a very slow operation.
Thus, given that speed is not a priority here, I place more value on
smaller, more compact, easily reviewable code -- the existing unpatched
code in this case.
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists