> On Aug 26, 2015, at 4:57 PM, Jesse Gross wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jarno Rajahalme
> wrote:
>> mf_mask_field_and_prereqs() used to memset a static variable again and
>> again. Now that mf_value is larger (due to tun_metadata field), this
>> is more expensive. Avoid this b
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> mf_mask_field_and_prereqs() used to memset a static variable again and
> again. Now that mf_value is larger (due to tun_metadata field), this
> is more expensive. Avoid this by using static initialization.
>
> mf_mask_field_and_prereqs()
> On Aug 26, 2015, at 1:08 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 03:25:23PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>> mf_mask_field_and_prereqs() used to memset a static variable again and
>> again. Now that mf_value is larger (due to tun_metadata field), this
>> is more expensive. Avoid thi
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 03:25:23PM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> mf_mask_field_and_prereqs() used to memset a static variable again and
> again. Now that mf_value is larger (due to tun_metadata field), this
> is more expensive. Avoid this by using static initialization.
>
> mf_mask_field_and_p
mf_mask_field_and_prereqs() used to memset a static variable again and
again. Now that mf_value is larger (due to tun_metadata field), this
is more expensive. Avoid this by using static initialization.
mf_mask_field_and_prereqs() is used only for set field and reg move,
which never deal with the
