On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 01:26:19PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 10:10:55 -0800
> Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > For the record, I fully agree with Steve here.
>
> Thanks, but...
>
> > >
> > > And being a performance "fanatic" I don't like to have the extra branch
> > > (and compares) in the free code path... but it's a MM-decision (and
> > > sometimes you should not listen to "fanatics" ;-))
> >
> > While free_rcu() is not withut its performance requirements, I think it's
> > currently dominated by cache misses and not by branches. By the time RCU
> > gets to run callbacks, memory is certainly L1/L2 cache-cold and probably
> > L3 cache-cold. Also calling the callback functions is utterly impossible
> > for the branch predictor.
>
> I agree with Matthew.
>
> This is far from any fast path. A few extra branches isn't going to
> hurt anything here as it's mostly just garbage collection. With or
> without the Spectre fixes.
What Steve said!
Thanx, Paul
