From 0b4fff15b92ea1f7d76c2e9e3766e3207f816837 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Felix Fietkau Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 21:46:51 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] kernel: add accidentally left out fib trie backport patch Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau git-svn-id: svn://svn.openwrt.org/openwrt/trunk@45650 3c298f89-4303-0410-b956-a3cf2f4a3e73 --- ...ex-0ul-n-bits-instead-of-index-n-bit.patch | 52 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+) create mode 100644 target/linux/generic/patches-3.18/080-19-fib_trie-Use-index-0ul-n-bits-instead-of-index-n-bit.patch diff --git a/target/linux/generic/patches-3.18/080-19-fib_trie-Use-index-0ul-n-bits-instead-of-index-n-bit.patch b/target/linux/generic/patches-3.18/080-19-fib_trie-Use-index-0ul-n-bits-instead-of-index-n-bit.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d5fc112563 --- /dev/null +++ b/target/linux/generic/patches-3.18/080-19-fib_trie-Use-index-0ul-n-bits-instead-of-index-n-bit.patch @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ +From: Alexander Duyck +Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:51:08 -0800 +Subject: [PATCH] fib_trie: Use index & (~0ul << n->bits) instead of index >> + n->bits + +In doing performance testing and analysis of the changes I recently found +that by shifting the index I had created an unnecessary dependency. + +I have updated the code so that we instead shift a mask by bits and then +just test against that as that should save us about 2 CPU cycles since we +can generate the mask while the key and pos are being processed. + +Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck +Signed-off-by: David S. Miller +--- + +--- a/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c ++++ b/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c +@@ -961,12 +961,12 @@ static struct tnode *fib_find_node(struc + * prefix plus zeros for the bits in the cindex. The index + * is the difference between the key and this value. From + * this we can actually derive several pieces of data. +- * if !(index >> bits) +- * we know the value is cindex +- * else ++ * if (index & (~0ul << bits)) + * we have a mismatch in skip bits and failed ++ * else ++ * we know the value is cindex + */ +- if (index >> n->bits) ++ if (index & (~0ul << n->bits)) + return NULL; + + /* we have found a leaf. Prefixes have already been compared */ +@@ -1301,12 +1301,12 @@ int fib_table_lookup(struct fib_table *t + * prefix plus zeros for the "bits" in the prefix. The index + * is the difference between the key and this value. From + * this we can actually derive several pieces of data. +- * if !(index >> bits) +- * we know the value is child index +- * else ++ * if (index & (~0ul << bits)) + * we have a mismatch in skip bits and failed ++ * else ++ * we know the value is cindex + */ +- if (index >> n->bits) ++ if (index & (~0ul << n->bits)) + break; + + /* we have found a leaf. Prefixes have already been compared */