netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: minor optimization in qdisc_qstats_cpu

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1472065647.14381.113.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:07:27 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: minor optimization in
 qdisc_qstats_cpu_drop()

On Wed, 2016-08-24 at 11:04 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 08/24/2016 10:23 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> >
> > per_cpu_inc() is faster (at least on x86) than per_cpu_ptr(xxx)++;
> 
> Is it possible it is non-trivially slower on other architectures?

No, in the worst case, compiler would emit the same code.