lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] atl1c: optimize rx loop
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 05:15:35AM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 12:04:47PM +0800, Sieng Piaw Liew wrote:
> > Remove this trivial bit of inefficiency from the rx receive loop,
> > results in increase of a few Mbps in iperf3. Tested on Intel Core2
> > platform.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sieng Piaw Liew <liew.s.piaw@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/atheros/atl1c/atl1c_main.c | 4 +---
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/atheros/atl1c/atl1c_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/atheros/atl1c/atl1c_main.c
> > index 3f65f2b370c5..b995f9a0479c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/atheros/atl1c/atl1c_main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/atheros/atl1c/atl1c_main.c
> > @@ -1796,9 +1796,7 @@ static void atl1c_clean_rx_irq(struct atl1c_adapter *adapter,
> > struct atl1c_recv_ret_status *rrs;
> > struct atl1c_buffer *buffer_info;
> >
> > - while (1) {
> > - if (*work_done >= work_to_do)
> > - break;
> > + while (*work_done < work_to_do) {
>
> It should not change anything, or only based on the compiler's optimization
> and should not result in a measurable difference because what it does is
> exactly the same. Have you really compared the compiled output code to
> explain the difference ? I strongly suspect you'll find no difference at
> all.
>
> Thus for me it's certainly not an optimization, it could be qualified as
> a cleanup to improve code readability however.
>
> Willy

You're right. Objdump and diff showed no difference.

Regards,
Sieng Piaw

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-03-22 01:55    [W:0.025 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site