On 2 June 2014 18:29, Yonghyeon PYUN <pyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 11:42:10AM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: >> >> On Jun 2, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> > .. and actually, bikeshedding for a moment, would we be able to move a >> > lot of these accessor methods over to inlines? Would that break the >> > Juniper way of doing things? >> >> That would definitely break Juniper as it doesn't give a stable >> ABI. >> >> I've suggested an approach that allows for both, but it was deemed >> unnecessary. The argument being that the function call overhead is >> negligible. >> >> We can always revisit that decision if needed... >> > > The function call overheads shall show measurable differences on > slow boxes. This change adds several function calls in driver's > fast path(interrupt handler, packet statistics, checksum > offloading checking and etc) and these functions would be called > on every TX/RX packet. > It would be great if there is a way to minimize function call > overheads in fast path.
I wonder if in the short term we should just use inlines for now, at least so the methodization can get done without hurting people on ARM/MIPS. ARM/MIPS people (me included) - let's see if we can generate some number? -a _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
