net: speed up skb_rbtree_purge()

As measured in my prior patch ("sch_netem: faster rb tree removal"),
rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe() is nice looking but much slower
than using rb_next() directly, except when tree is small enough
to fit in CPU caches (then the cost is the same)

Also note that there is not even an increase of text size :
$ size net/core/skbuff.o.before net/core/skbuff.o
   text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
  40711	   1298	      0	  42009	   a419	net/core/skbuff.o.before
  40711	   1298	      0	  42009	   a419	net/core/skbuff.o

From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
(cherry picked from commit 7c90584c66cc4b033a3b684b0e0950f79e7b7166)
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
index 2e5eeba97de9e0f8590ab06fe45b653ce32efc84..c7c5f05f2af16d7019de07f36fee7f0fa5e81c35 100644 (file)
--- a/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -2850,12 +2850,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(skb_queue_purge);
  */
 void skb_rbtree_purge(struct rb_root *root)
 {
-       struct sk_buff *skb, *next;
+       struct rb_node *p = rb_first(root);
 
-       rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe(skb, next, root, rbnode)
-               kfree_skb(skb);
+       while (p) {
+               struct sk_buff *skb = rb_entry(p, struct sk_buff, rbnode);
 
-       *root = RB_ROOT;
+               p = rb_next(p);
+               rb_erase(&skb->rbnode, root);
+               kfree_skb(skb);
+       }
 }
 
 /**