[Top] [All Lists]

Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr

To: Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:05:25 -0500
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, Niv Sardi <xaiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4808488A.7010204@xxxxxxx>
References: <20080319204014.GA23644@xxxxxx> <ncciqylf7q0.fsf@xxxxxxx> <20080414032940.GA10579@xxxxxx> <ncclk3ejwam.fsf@xxxxxxx> <20080416063712.GN108924158@xxxxxxx> <4805A589.7080906@xxxxxxx> <87ve2i5kbs.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4808488A.7010204@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20080226)
Timothy Shimmin wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for the explanation, Andi.
> So I guess the upshot is, that it can make a difference but
> in many cases (where the perf difference isn't an issue)
> it is probably not worth the ugliness.
> And in performance cases, it would be best to test the hypothesis
> with the unlikely profiler patch
> => it will be _unlikely_ we will bother ;-)
> So I don't think I'll be bothering with them then unless
> an issue comes up :)
> --Tim

ISTR that the dir2 code on Irix had tons of compiler pragmas for likely
and unlikely paths, and that it actually was well-profiled and tested.
Did that ever get translated into Linux hints?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>