ok, thank you all.

2014-09-16 0:52 GMT+08:00 Yehuda Sadeh <[email protected]>:

> I agree with Greg. When dealing with the latencies that we deal with due
> to different IO operations (networking, storage), it's mostly not worth the
> trouble. I think the main reason we didn't actually put it to use is that
> we forgot we've had this macro defined, and it really wasn't worth the
> trouble. I do think though that we can keep it in mind, and when developing
> add these notations when appropriate even if only for code readability.
>
> Thanks,
> Yehuda
>
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Gregory Farnum <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I don't know where the file came from, but likely/unlikely markers are
>> the kind of micro-optimization that isn't worth the cost in Ceph dev
>> resources right now.
>> -Greg
>>
>>
>> On Monday, September 15, 2014, Tim Zhang <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey guys,
>>> After reading ceph source code, I find that there is a file named
>>> common/likely.h and it implements the function likely() and unlikey() which
>>> will optimize the prediction of code branch for cpu.
>>>  But there isn't any place using these two functions, I am curious
>>> about why the developer of ceph not using these two functions to achieve
>>> more performance. Can anyone provide some hints?
>>> BR
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ceph-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to