[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55E164C6.3000702@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 13:22:38 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
kaber@...sh.net, jiri@...nulli.us, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
tom@...bertland.com, azhou@...ira.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
ipm@...rality.org.uk, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com,
serge.hallyn@...onical.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, anton@....ibm.com,
nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V2 2/2] net: Optimize snmp stat aggregation by walking
all the percpu data at once
On 08/29/2015 08:56 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-08-29 at 08:27 +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
>>
>> /* Use put_unaligned() because stats may not be aligned for u64. */
>> put_unaligned(items, &stats[0]);
>
>
>> for (i = 1; i < items; i++)
>> - put_unaligned(snmp_fold_field64(mib, i, syncpoff), &stats[i]);
>> + put_unaligned(buff[i], &stats[i]);
>>
>
> I believe Joe suggested following code instead :
>
> buff[0] = items;
> memcpy(stats, buff, items * sizeof(u64));
Thanks. Sure, will use this.
(I missed that. I thought that it was applicable only when we have
aligned data,and for power, put_aunaligned was not a nop unlike intel).
>
> Also please move buff[] array into __snmp6_fill_stats64() to make it
> clear it is used in a 'leaf' function.
Correct.
>
> (even if calling memcpy()/memset() makes it not a leaf function)
>
--
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