Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Although using "inline" like this does not look clean, we could see > > measurable performance improvements: get_dirty_log for 1GB dirty memory > > became faster by more than 10% on my test box. > > > > WOW. I'd have assumed the processor deals better with this; it should > be 100% predicted branches. > > But I won't argue with cold data. What I checked was: original with-patch2 with-patch3 8.7ms 8.5ms 7.5ms I assumed that without "inline" only __rmap_get_next() would be inlined into rmap_get_next() so did like this. I thought the improvement was just from removing one function call for each rmap_write_protect. Not sure if anything was changed with branch predictions. Takuya -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
