linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] Optimize compound_head() by avoiding a shared page flag

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 7 Apr 2007 15:51:48 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	dgc@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Optimize compound_head() by avoiding a shared page
 flag

On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 15:16:17 -0700 (PDT) Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:

> On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > Did you investigate
> > 
> > static inline int page_tail(struct page *page)
> > {
> > 	return ((page->flags & (PG_compound|PG_tail)) == (PG_compound|PG_tail));
> > }
> 
> The usual test_bit that we are using there uses a volatile reference 
> so these wont be combined if I check them separately.
> 
> A working example of the above would be much uglier:
> 
> static inline int page_tail(struct page *page)
> {
>  	return ((page->flags & ((1L << PG_compound)|(1L << PG_tail))) == 
> ((1L << PG_compound)|(1L << PG_tail)));
> }
> 
> May be this can be cleaned up somehow.

It might generate better code to do

	unsigned long compound;

	compound = page->flags & (1 << PG_compound);
	if (PG_compound > PG_tail)
		return compound & (page->flags << (PG_compound - PG_tail));
	else
		return compound & (page->flags << (PG_tail - PG_compound));


ie: get the PG_compound flag into `compound', then bitwise-and that with
the PG_tail flag, after shifting it into PG_compound' slot.  The return
value will be zero if either bit is clear, (1<<PG_compound) if both are
set.  The `if (PG_compound > PG_tail)' will be swallowed by the compiler.

The compiler should turn it all into

	(page->flags & N) & (page->flags << M)

Which may or may not be better than (page->flags & N == N), dunno. 
Probably not - if the compiler's any good it won't save a branch, I
suspect.



Which is all a ton of fun, but this subversion of the architecture's
freedom to use volatile, memory barriers etc is a worry.  We do the same in
page_alloc.c, of course...  

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/