[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: [2.6.22 PATCH 22/26] dm: bio list helpers
- From: Alan Cox <alan lxorguk ukuu org uk>
- To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh linux01 gwdg de>
- Cc: dm-devel redhat com, linux-kernel vger kernel org, Heinz Mauelshagen <hjm redhat com>, Jens Axboe <jens axboe oracle com>, Andrew Morton <akpm linux-foundation org>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk redhat com>
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: [2.6.22 PATCH 22/26] dm: bio list helpers
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 15:29:57 +0100
On Thu, 10 May 2007 16:17:57 +0200 (MEST)
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh linux01 gwdg de> wrote:
>
> On May 9 2007 08:49, Jens Axboe wrote:
> >On Tue, May 08 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >> > +#define bio_list_for_each(bio, bl) \
> >> > + for (bio = (bl)->head; bio && ({ prefetch(bio->bi_next); 1; }); \
> >> > + bio = bio->bi_next)
> >> > +
> >
> >Besides, manual prefetching is very rarely a win. I dabbled with some
> >benchmarks a few weeks back (with the doubly linked lists), and in most
> >cases it was actually a loss. So I'd vote for just removing the
> >prefetch() above.
>
> So is the prefetching in the basic ADTs (e.g. linux/list.h) a loss too?
Depends on the box it seems. On the newest systems the processor
prefetching seems to be very much smarter. On a "classic" AMD Athlon the
prefetching made the scheduler about 1.5% faster...
Alan
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]