[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141108221149.GA26030@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 23:11:49 +0100
From: Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
To: Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
nic_swsd <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] r8152: clear theflagofSCHEDULE_TASKLETin
tasklet
Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com> :
> Francois Romieu [mailto:romieu@...zoreil.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 6:53 AM
> [...]
> > test_and_clear_bit (dense) or clear_bit would be more idiomatic.
>
> Excuse me. Any suggestion?
> Should I use clear_bit directly, or something else?
> Or, do I have to remove this patch?
The performance explanation leaves me a bit unconvinced. Without any
figure one could simply go for the always locked clear_bit because of:
1. the "I'm racy" message that the open-coded test + set sends
2. the extra work needed to avoid 1 (comment, explain, ...).
The extra time could thus be used to see what happens when napi is
shoehorned in this tasklet machinery. I'd naively expect it to be
relevant for efficiency.
I won't mind if your agenda is completely different. :o)
--
Ueimor
--
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