Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Thu, 02 Oct 2003 19:26:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gaz.sfgoth.com ([63.205.85.133]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id h932Pa25007969 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 19:25:36 -0700 Received: from gaz.sfgoth.com (localhost.sfgoth.com [127.0.0.1]) by gaz.sfgoth.com (8.12.9p1/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h932YW16044036; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 19:34:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mitch@gaz.sfgoth.com) Received: (from mitch@localhost) by gaz.sfgoth.com (8.12.9p1/8.12.6/Submit) id h932YVZs044035; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 19:34:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mitch) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 19:34:31 -0700 From: Mitchell Blank Jr To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] skbuff more likely/unlikely Message-ID: <20031003023431.GC42593@gaz.sfgoth.com> References: <20031002102420.6e1cece9.shemminger@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031002102420.6e1cece9.shemminger@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-archive-position: 485 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: mitch@sfgoth.com Precedence: bulk X-list: netdev 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? Original patch: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/netdev/archive/2003-09/msg00036.html -Mitch