![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 5/30/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 11:10:05PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > > On May 28 2007 19:11, Adrian Bunk wrote: > You completely miss the point of my question. > > It's about the performance improvements of the modified code that were > mentioned. > > What you are talking about shouldn't have any effect on the generated > code. > After Daniel refined this testing program, we can see that perf gain is < 2% which can surely be accounted to cleanups like unnecessary castings in tight loops. Again, all the original code has been retained _as-is_. Whatever was changed, has been mentioned in that detailed changelog that I post along with patch. If someone want to review these 500 lines with this changelog in hand, it should not take more than couple of hours. If no-one can see any problem in code by now and considering that it's tested on x86(_32), amd64, ppc and giving somewhat better perf. than original then I believe it is unnecessarily hanging outside of -mm tree. I also contacted author (Markus Oberhumer) regarding above changes but he seems not be responding right now. But still, if it gets into -mm and gets used by various related projects then it should be good enough for mainline also. Cheers, Nitin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2007-05-30 05:35 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||