[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/cpu: Improvements to get_cpu_vendor()
On 03/01/17 12:40, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 03.01.17 at 13:06, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Comparing 3 integers is more efficient than using strcmp(), and is more >> useful >> to the gcv_guest case than having to fabricate a suitable string to pass. >> The >> gcv_host cases have both options easily to hand, and experimentally, the >> resulting code is more efficient. >> >> While modifying get_cpu_vendor(), fix a bug where this_cpu got updated even >> in >> the gcv_guest case. > Isn't this something we'd better fix separately, to ease backporting? I can do. > >> Update the cpu_dev structure to be more efficient. c_vendor[] only needs to >> be 8 bytes long to cover all the CPU drivers Xen has, which avoids storing an >> 8-byte pointer to 8 bytes of data. Drop c_ident[1] as we have no CPU drivers >> with a second ident string, and turn it into a transparent union to allow >> access to the integer values directly. > I think "transparent" is misleading here, as you don't add the respective > gcc attribute. I think you mean "unnamed". Yes sorry. My mistake. > >> This avoids all need for the vendor_id union in update_domain_cpuid_info(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> > For the patch itself > Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> Does this still stand if I split the patch into two, for easier backport? ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |