On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 11:46:42 +0100 Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
quoted
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 20:51:23 -0700
David Ahern [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
A long over due look at the organization of this struct.
Yes, I was surprised that the cache-lines used in fast-path was this
spread out.
I tried measuring the cache misses on struct netdevice running
relatively network-heavy production workload once but they were
really deep in the noise. Things become much easier to optimize
with a XDP micro-benchmark, but obviously should benefit all.
There is a comment /* Cache lines mostly used on receive path */
but that comment no-longer start on a cacheline, so I suspect that this
have slowly diverted over time (Eric's commit 9356b8fc07 dates back to 2005).
Patch is already applied. I expected people to would say that I also
needed to adjust the doc-type comments. The comments describing the
members, seems to be ordered the same way as defined. Should we/I keep
that order intact? (when moving members)
kdoc didn't complain, and as you say it's already a mess, plus it's
two screen-fulls of scrolling away...
I think converting to inline kdoc of members would be an improvement,
if you want to sign up for that? Otherwise -EDIDNTCARE on my side :)
On 1/29/21 8:35 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
kdoc didn't complain, and as you say it's already a mess, plus it's
two screen-fulls of scrolling away...
I think converting to inline kdoc of members would be an improvement,
if you want to sign up for that? Otherwise -EDIDNTCARE on my side :)
What about removing this kdoc ?
kdoc for a huge structure is mostly useless...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:47:41 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote:
On 1/29/21 8:35 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
quoted
kdoc didn't complain, and as you say it's already a mess, plus it's
two screen-fulls of scrolling away...
I think converting to inline kdoc of members would be an improvement,
if you want to sign up for that? Otherwise -EDIDNTCARE on my side :)
What about removing this kdoc ?
kdoc for a huge structure is mostly useless...
It's definitely not useful for "us", I'd guess most seasoned developers
will just grep for uses of the field - but maybe it is useful for noobs
trying to have high-level sense of the code?
Either way is fine by me, we can always preserve meaningful comments
inline without the kdoc decorator.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 12:07:23 -0800
Jakub Kicinski [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 20:47:41 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote:
quoted
On 1/29/21 8:35 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
quoted
kdoc didn't complain, and as you say it's already a mess, plus it's
two screen-fulls of scrolling away...
I think converting to inline kdoc of members would be an improvement,
if you want to sign up for that? Otherwise -EDIDNTCARE on my side :)
What about removing this kdoc ?
kdoc for a huge structure is mostly useless...
It's definitely not useful for "us", I'd guess most seasoned developers
will just grep for uses of the field - but maybe it is useful for noobs
trying to have high-level sense of the code?
Either way is fine by me, we can always preserve meaningful comments
inline without the kdoc decorator.
I agree that removing this kdoc makes sense. But as Jakub says we
should preserve meaningful comments inline. I'll add this task to my
TODO list, but anyone feel free to do the work before I get around to it.
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer