On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 01:08:07PM -0700, Elliot Berman wrote: > > Perhaps we should start off by doing the below, instead of making it > > more complicated instead. I suppose you're right about the overhead, but > > run a hackbench just to make sure or something. > > > > I ran perf bench sched message -g 40 -l 40 with the v3 patch [1]. After 60 > iterations each, I don't see a significant difference on my arm64 platform: > both samples ~normal and ~eq variance w/t-test p-value: 0.79. > > We also ran typical high level benchmarks for our SoCs (antutu, > geekbench, et. al) and didn't see any regressions there. So if you would've made this 2 patches, the first removing the ifdef, then the changelog for that patch would be a good place to mention it doesn't measurably regress things. As a bonus, it then makes your other changes smaller too ;-)
