Le mardi 03 janvier 2012 à 12:01 +0000, David Laight a écrit :
> > if (acct) {
> > - spin_lock_bh(&ct->lock);
> > - acct[CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo)].packets++;
> > - acct[CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo)].bytes += skb->len;
> > - spin_unlock_bh(&ct->lock);
> > + atomic64_inc(&acct[CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo)].packets);
> > + atomic64_add(skb->len,
> &acct[CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo)].bytes);
> > }
>
> On a 32bit arch the two atomic64 operations require a locked
> bus cycle each. The spin_unlock_bh() may not need one - so
> the code may now be slower (modulo lock contention etc).
>
> Probably worth caching &acct[CTINFO2DIR(ctinfo)] in a local,
> the compiler probably can't do it itself.
You're mistaken.
Compile a UP kernel and check yourself before doing such claims.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
