lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: add prefetching to do_csum
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 11:17:39AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 14:07 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 08:51:07AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 11:25 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:07:38PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 15:02 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 09:19:23AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > []
> > > > > > > __always_inline instead of inline
> > > > > > > static __always_inline void prefetch_lines(const void *addr, size_t len)
> > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > const void *end = addr + len;
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > buff doesn't need a void * cast in prefetch_lines
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually I take back what I said here, we do need the cast, not for a conversion
> > > > > > from unsigned char * to void *, but rather to discard the const qualifier
> > > > > > without making the compiler complain.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not if the function is changed to const void *
> > > > > and end is also const void * as shown.
> > > > >
> > > > Addr is incremented in the for loop, so it can't be const. I could add a loop
> > > > counter variable on the stack, but that doesn't seem like it would help anything
> > >
> > > Perhaps you meant
> > > void * const addr;
> > > but that's not what I wrote.
> > >
> > No, I meant smoething like:
> > static __always_inline void prefetch_lines(const void * addr, size_t len)
> > {
> > const void *tmp = (void *)addr;
> > ...
> > for(;tmp<end; tmp+=cache_line_size())
> > ...
> > }
> >
> > > Let me know if this doesn't compile.
> > > It does here...
> > Huh, it does. But that makes very little sense to me. by qualifying addr as
> > const, how is the compiler not throwing a warning in the for loop about us
> > incrementing that same variable?
>
> Because it points to const data but is not const itself.
>
> void * const foo; /* value of foo can't change */
> const void *bar; /* data pointed to by bar can't change */
> const void * const baz; /* Neither baz nor data pointed to by baz can change */
>
Doh! Wow, that was just staring me in the face and I missed it :)

Thanks for pointing it out. I'll make that adjustment
Neil



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-11-08 21:21    [W:0.549 / U:0.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site