On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 01:40:36PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, 1 Dec 2014 14:34:55 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 01:02:58PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > On Mon, 1 Dec 2014 13:46:45 +0200 > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 12:33:15PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 1 Dec 2014 11:26:58 +0200 > > > > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > For some places on data path, it might be worth it > > > > > > to cache the correct value e.g. as part of device > > > > > > structure. This replaces a branch with a memory load, > > > > > > so the gain would have to be measured, best done > > > > > > separately? > > > > > > > > > > I think we'll want to do some measuring once the basic structure is > > > > > in place anyway. > > > > > > > > What's meant by in place here? > > > > > > That this patchset is ready :) > > > > Also it's ready to the level where benchmarking is possible, right? I > > don't think you should wait until we finish polishing up commit > > messages. > > My point is that I haven't even found time yet to test this > thouroughly :( If my experience shows anything, it's unlikely we'll get appropriate testing without code being upstream first. That's why I pushed on with sparse tagging btw. This way we can be reasonably sure we didn't miss some path. -- MST _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
