| To: | Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] skbuff more likely/unlikely |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 3 Oct 2003 00:19:16 -0700 |
| Cc: | shemminger@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20031003023431.GC42593@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20031002102420.6e1cece9.shemminger@xxxxxxxx> <20031003023431.GC42593@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 19:34:31 -0700 Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > A couple more places where we can help by hinting the compiler > > for 2.6.0-test6. If we are pulling off header, is is likely there; > > and skb alloc's succeed in the normal case. > > > > Thought I saw an earlier similar patch, but here is my take on it. > > Yes, my patch from a couple weeks ago does the same thing (but also > did a lot in skbuff.c) I haven't had a chance to rediff and test > after the const parts went in. Do you want to adopt the rest of the > changes? I applied Stephen's patch here, you can post something relative to that if you like. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] consolidate skb delivery, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: do_gettimeofday, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] skbuff more likely/unlikely, Mitchell Blank Jr |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] consolidate skb delivery, Stephen Hemminger |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |