Linux Ethernet Bridging - Aug 2010 - [Bridge] [rfc] bridge: is PACKET_LOOPBACK unlikely()?

While looking at using netdev_rx_handler_register for openvswitch Jesse
Gross suggested that an unlikely() might be worthwhile in that code.
I'm interested to see if its appropriate for the bridge code.

Cc: Jesse Gross <jesse at nicira.com>
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au>

Index: net-next-2.6/net/bridge/br_input.c
==================================================================---
net-next-2.6.orig/net/bridge/br_input.c	2010-08-23 12:17:58.000000000 +0900
+++ net-next-2.6/net/bridge/br_input.c	2010-08-23 12:19:46.000000000 +0900
@@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ struct sk_buff *br_handle_frame(struct s
 	const unsigned char *dest = eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest;
 	int (*rhook)(struct sk_buff *skb);
 
-	if (skb->pkt_type == PACKET_LOOPBACK)
+	if (unlikely(skb->pkt_type == PACKET_LOOPBACK))
 		return skb;
 
 	if (!is_valid_ether_addr(eth_hdr(skb)->h_source))

From: Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:35:32 +0900
> While looking at using netdev_rx_handler_register for openvswitch Jesse
> Gross suggested that an unlikely() might be worthwhile in that code.
> I'm interested to see if its appropriate for the bridge code.
> 
> Cc: Jesse Gross <jesse at nicira.com>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au>
Seems reasonable to me, applied to net-next-2.6