linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] Fix Unlikely(x) == y

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]

Message-Id: <1203249003.6718.24.camel@concordia>
Date:	Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:50:03 +1100
From:	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Geoff Levand <geoffrey.levand@...sony.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, Roel Kluin <12o3l@...cali.nl>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	cbe-oss-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Fix Unlikely(x) == y

On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 10:39 -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > >> > you found a great set of bugs..
> > >> > but to be honest... I suspect it's just best to remove unlikely
> > >> > altogether for these cases; unlikely() is almost a
> > >> > go-faster-stripes thing, and if you don't know how to use it you
> > >> > shouldn't be using it... so just removing it for all wrong cases
> > >> > is actually the best thing to do imo.

Hi Arjan,

In general I agree with you that unlikely() is overused, and often in
inappropriate places.

> for mordern (last 10 years) x86 cpus... the cpu branchpredictor is better
> than the coder in general. Same for most other architectures.
> 
> unlikely() creates bigger code as well.
> 
> Now... we're talking about your super duper hotpath function here right?
> One where you care about 0.5 cycle speed improvement? (less on modern
> systems ;)

The first patch was to platforms/ps3 code, which runs on the Cell, in
particular the PPE ... which is not an x86 :)

eg:

[michael@...oenaich ~]$ cat branch.c
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
        int i, j;

        for (i = 0, j = 0; i < 1000000000; i++)
                if (i % 4 == 0)
                        j++;

        printf("j = %d\n", j);
        return 0;
}
[michael@...oenaich ~]$ ppu-gcc -Wall -O3 -o branch branch.c
[michael@...oenaich ~]$ time ./branch
real    0m5.172s

[michael@...oenaich ~]$ cat branch.c
..
        for (i = 0, j = 0; i < 1000000000; i++)
                if (__builtin_expect(i % 4 == 0, 0))
                        j++;
..
[michael@...oenaich ~]$ ppu-gcc -Wall -O3 -o branch branch.c
[michael@...oenaich ~]$ time ./branch
real    0m3.762s


Which looks as though unlikely() is helping. Admittedly we don't have a
lot of kernel code that looks like that, but at least unlikely is doing
what we want it to.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)