From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May 30 16:00:42 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2F2A106564A
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 30 May 2008 16:00:42 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rihad@mail.ru)
Received: from mx30.mail.ru (mx30.mail.ru [194.67.23.238])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47368FC18
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Fri, 30 May 2008 16:00:42 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rihad@mail.ru)
Received: from [217.25.27.27] (port=9175 helo=[217.25.27.27])
	by mx30.mail.ru with asmtp 
	id 1K2720-0004vC-00; Fri, 30 May 2008 20:00:41 +0400
Message-ID: <484024A5.6080109@mail.ru>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 21:00:37 +0500
From: rihad <rihad@mail.ru>
User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.14eol (X11/20080509)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org>
References: <483FFE36.7050006@mail.ru> <4840200F.6070602@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4840200F.6070602@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam: Not detected
X-Mras: OK
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: if_var.h micro-optimization
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 16:00:43 -0000

Bruce M. Simpson wrote:
> rihad wrote:
>> Not sure if this is a worthwhile optimization? FreeBSD 7.0
>>
>> --- /usr/src/sys/net/if_var.h   2007-12-07 09:46:08.000000000 +0400
>> +++ if_var.h    2008-05-30 18:10:25.000000000 +0500
>> @@ -282,7 +282,8 @@
>>         if (m) {                                                \
>>                 if (((ifq)->ifq_head = (m)->m_nextpkt) == NULL) \
>>                         (ifq)->ifq_tail = NULL;                 \
>> -               (m)->m_nextpkt = NULL;                          \
>> +               else                                            \
>> +                       (m)->m_nextpkt = NULL;                  \
>>                 (ifq)->ifq_len--;                               \
>>         }                                                       \
>>  } while (0)
> 
> It could save dirtying an L2 data cache line at the expense of taking a 
> conditional branch,
Whoa, why don't you take it easy on me :) I'm not that much into kernel 
(or hardware) programming. It's just that reading Ch. 3 of TCP/IP 
Illustrated Vol.2 by Rich Stevens got me digging around FreeBSD source 
code dealing with struct ifnet, where this piece of code caught my 
attention.


> but to evaluate your suggested change requires a lot 
> more data. Do you plan to do this? 
Perhaps there is already a framework for trying out changes in -CURRENT 
and seeing their relative impact, so perhaps someone more experienced 
than I am can see to this?


> Given how _IF_DEQUEUE() is normally 
> used the impact is likely negligible.
Oh, I see. A nice first attempt of mine anyway ;) Thanks.