Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 14:54:22 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= <royger@FreeBSD.org> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r301197 - head/sys/dev/xen/netfront Message-ID: <20160602125422.gmdsueoeu5fiiec5@mac> In-Reply-To: <2c81e44d-65de-10f0-8837-f23896855150@selasky.org> References: <201606021114.u52BEQqB047172@repo.freebsd.org> <2c81e44d-65de-10f0-8837-f23896855150@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:19:56PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On 06/02/16 13:14, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > + callout_reset(&rxq->rx_refill, hz/10, xn_alloc_rx_buffers_callout, > > + rxq); > > Maybe use callout_reset_curcpu() to take advantage of callout's SMP > capabilities ? Yes, that's fine. But what's the benefit of it? I don't really care whether the callout is run on the current CPU or not. Is callout_reset_curcpu cheaper than callout_reset? Roger.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160602125422.gmdsueoeu5fiiec5>