From: Mohammad Jamal
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 23:32:40 +0530
> This patch optimizes __skb_push function
>
> Signed-off-by: Mohammad Jamal
A patch with a commit message that doesn't even explain the
optimization, or why it is worthwhile to make that optimization,
will not be applied, sorry.
--
To
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>
>> Hmm, this seems less readable to me. What is the effect of this patch?
>> Does the compiler even produce different assembly?
>
> No change at all in generated assembly, this looks not
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> Hmm, this seems less readable to me. What is the effect of this patch?
> Does the compiler even produce different assembly?
No change at all in generated assembly, this looks not worth it.
BTW, most __skb_push() callers ignore return value.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Mohammad Jamal
wrote:
> This patch optimizes __skb_push function
>
> Signed-off-by: Mohammad Jamal
> ---
> include/linux/skbuff.h |3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> inde
This patch optimizes __skb_push function
Signed-off-by: Mohammad Jamal
---
include/linux/skbuff.h |3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
index 85ab7d7..9acffb2 100644
--- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
+++ b/include/linu
5 matches
Mail list logo