lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Should we be using unlikely() around tests of GFP_ZERO?
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 16:10 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:

> > correct incorrect % Function File Line
> > ------- --------- - -------- ---- ----
> > 6890998 2784830 28 slab_alloc slub.c 1719
> >
> > That's incorrect 28% of the time.
>
> Thanks! AFAICT, that number is high enough to justify removing the
> unlikely() annotations, no?

Personally, I think anything that is incorrect more that 5% of the time
should not have any annotation.

My rule is to use the annotation when a branch goes one way 95% or more.
With the exception of times when we want a particular path to be the
faster path, because we know its in a more critical position (as there
are cases in the scheduler and the tracing infrastructure itself).

But here, I think removing it is the right decision.

-- Steve




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-03 15:29    [W:1.046 / U:0.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site