* Tim Chen <tim.c.c...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > If we prefer to optimize this a bit though, perhaps we can first move
> > the node->lock = 0 so that it gets executed after the "if (likely(prev
> > == NULL)) {}" code block and then delete "node->lock = 1" inside the
> > code block.
>
> I suppose we can save one single assignment. The gain is probably not
> noticeable as once we set node->next to NULL, node->locked is likely in
> local cache line and the assignment operation is cheap.
Would be nice to have this as a separate, add-on patch. Every single
instruction removal that has no downside is an upside!
You can add a comment that explains it.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
