[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811262355100.3325@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:16:45 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: eranian@...il.com
cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, x86@...nel.org,
sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: [patch 05/24] perfmon: X86 generic code (x86)
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, stephane eranian wrote:
> > What a nonsense. We have a bitmask already. Why not iterate over the
> > bitmask and be done ?
> >
>
> Bitmask can be sparsed. Num represents the number of bits we have to find.
> The idea is that we don't need to scan the entire bitmask, we stop as soon as
> we have found all the bits we care about (i.e., all the bits that are set).
>
> Example:
> num = 3
> bitmask=0000000010001001
> ^ we will iterate until we are
> done with that bit.
Errm.
#define for_each_bit(bit, addr, size) \
for ((bit) = find_first_bit((addr), (size)); \
(bit) < (size); \
(bit) = find_next_bit((addr), (size), (bit) + 1))
find_first_bit() and find_next_bit() are single instructions on most
architectures. "size" is known upfront at setup time of the
context/set and can be cached.
This takes exactly 3 iterations, while your method needs 8. And it
gets worse with the following example:
Example:
num = 1
bitmask=1000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 00000
^ you will iterate until we are done with that bit (32 times)
for_each_bit() will iterate exactly _once_.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists