| commit | 7c90584c66cc4b033a3b684b0e0950f79e7b7166 | |
| author | Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> | |
| Sat, 23 Sep 2017 19:39:12 +0000 (23 12:39 -0700) | ||
| committer | David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> | |
| Tue, 26 Sep 2017 03:35:11 +0000 (25 20:35 -0700) | ||
| tree | 884ffbcadfd487468650145f79ab702716c4a7d4 | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | 3aa605f28b0d004a640a826380b39c7dcf70195d | commitdiff |
net: speed up skb_rbtree_purge()
As measured in my prior patch ("sch_netem: faster rb tree removal"),
rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe() is nice looking but much slower
than using rb_next() directly, except when tree is small enough
to fit in CPU caches (then the cost is the same)
Also note that there is not even an increase of text size :
$ size net/core/skbuff.o.before net/core/skbuff.o
text data bss dec hex filename
40711 1298 0 42009 a419 net/core/skbuff.o.before
40711 1298 0 42009 a419 net/core/skbuff.o
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
As measured in my prior patch ("sch_netem: faster rb tree removal"),
rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe() is nice looking but much slower
than using rb_next() directly, except when tree is small enough
to fit in CPU caches (then the cost is the same)
Also note that there is not even an increase of text size :
$ size net/core/skbuff.o.before net/core/skbuff.o
text data bss dec hex filename
40711 1298 0 42009 a419 net/core/skbuff.o.before
40711 1298 0 42009 a419 net/core/skbuff.o
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
| net/core/skbuff.c | diffblobblamehistory |