Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 20 Aug 2016 10:54:53 -0400
From:      Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>
To:        koobs@freebsd.org
Cc:        Ryan Stone <rstone@freebsd.org>,  "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>,  "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>,  "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r304435 - head/sys/netinet
Message-ID:  <CAFMmRNwG3RpPMpJM_WaVodN8YKiXC4t=%2B_CrFz=tSJCg--4iZw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <96b7428a-0a57-6d6d-4b2e-24010596ceaf@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201608182259.u7IMx0bx001967@repo.freebsd.org> <96b7428a-0a57-6d6d-4b2e-24010596ceaf@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 6:08 AM, Kubilay Kocak <koobs@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Hi Ryan,
>
> Could you elaborate on any of the potential performance implications of
> this?
>

As if r304437, skipping the call to in_broadcast() means that we avoid an
additional (potentially heavily contended) rlock acquire and release on the
ifnet address list.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFMmRNwG3RpPMpJM_WaVodN8YKiXC4t=%2B_CrFz=tSJCg--4iZw>