Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:65074 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751399Ab0KEICx convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2010 04:02:53 -0400 Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so2126900fxm.19 for ; Fri, 05 Nov 2010 01:02:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Helmut Schaa To: =?utf-8?q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/13] rt2x00: Add unlikely to skb allocation failure check Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 09:01:59 +0100 Cc: Christian Lamparter , Ivo van Doorn , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <201011042037.00178.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <201011050823.48982.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201011050901.59251.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Am Freitag 05 November 2010 schrieb Rafał Miłecki: > 2010/11/5 Helmut Schaa : > > Interesting, didn't know that. I've just given it a try and the MIPS assembly > > indeed stays the same with and without the unlikely. Nevertheless, I've found > > quite a number of unlikely(!x) checks throughout the net stack ... > > What do you mean by x? AFAIU gcc optimization is only for pointers. If > x is some int (bool), it still has affect. I meant x to be a pointer, yes. Helmut