Message-Id: <20120314174356.40c35a07.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:43:56 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>
Cc:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] radix-tree: introduce bit-optimized iterator

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:25:42 +0400
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org> wrote:

> This patch implements clean, simple and effective radix-tree iteration routine.
> 
> Iterating divided into two phases:
> * lookup next chunk in radix-tree leaf node
> * iterating through slots in this chunk
> 
> Main iterator function radix_tree_next_chunk() returns pointer to first slot,
> and stores in the struct radix_tree_iter index of next-to-last slot.
> For tagged-iterating it also constuct bitmask of tags for retunted chunk.
> All additional logic implemented as static-inline functions and macroses.
> 
> Also patch adds radix_tree_find_next_bit() static-inline variant of
> find_next_bit() optimized for small constant size arrays, because
> find_next_bit() too heavy for searching in an array with one/two long elements.
> 
> ...
>
> +
> +static inline
> +void **radix_tree_iter_init(struct radix_tree_iter *iter, unsigned long start)

Nit: if we're going to line break a function definition/declaration
line like this then the usual way is to split it before the function
name, so

static inline void **
radix_tree_iter_init(struct radix_tree_iter *iter, unsigned long start)

Old-school people did this so they could find the function with
/^radix_tree_iter_init in vi ;)

> +{
> +	iter->index = 0; /* to bypass next_index overflow protection */
> +	iter->next_index = start;
> +	return NULL;
> +}

Why didn't it initialize .tags?

In fact .tags only ever gets initialized deep inside
radix_tree_next_chunk(), if !radix_tree_is_indirect_ptr().  Is this
correct?

>
> ...
>
> +/**
> + * radix_tree_next_slot - find next slot in chunk
> + *
> + * @slot	pointer to slot
> + * @iter	iterator state
> + * @flags	RADIX_TREE_ITER_*
> + *
> + * Returns pointer to next slot, or NULL if no more left.
> + */
> +static __always_inline
> +void **radix_tree_next_slot(void **slot, struct radix_tree_iter *iter,
> +			    unsigned flags)
> +{
> +	unsigned size, offset;

'offset' could be made local to the single code block which uses it. 
personally I find that this leads to clearer code.

> +	size = radix_tree_chunk_size(iter) - 1;

radix_tree_chunk_size() returns unsigned long, and we just threw away
the upper 32 bits.  I'm unsure if that's a bug, but it's messy and
possibly inefficient.

> +	if (flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED) {
> +		iter->tags >>= 1;
> +		if (likely(iter->tags & 1ul)) {
> +			iter->index++;
> +			return slot + 1;
> +		}
> +		if ((flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_CONTIG) && size)
> +			return NULL;
> +		if (likely(iter->tags)) {
> +			offset = __ffs(iter->tags);
> +			iter->tags >>= offset;
> +			iter->index += offset + 1;
> +			return slot + offset + 1;
> +		}
> +	} else {
> +		while (size--) {
> +			slot++;
> +			iter->index++;
> +			if (likely(*slot))
> +				return slot;
> +			if (flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_CONTIG)
> +				return NULL;
> +		}
> +	}
> +	return NULL;
> +}

This is a whopping big function.  Why was it inlined?  Are you sure
that was a correct decision?

> +/**
> + * radix_tree_for_each_chunk - iterate over chunks
> + *
> + * @slot:	the void** for pointer to chunk first slot
> + * @root	the struct radix_tree_root pointer
> + * @iter	the struct radix_tree_iter pointer
> + * @start	starting index
> + * @flags	RADIX_TREE_ITER_* and tag index

Some of the arguments have a colon, others don't.

> + * Locks can be released and reasquired between iterations.

"reacquired"

> + */
> +#define radix_tree_for_each_chunk(slot, root, iter, start, flags)	\
> +	for ( slot = radix_tree_iter_init(iter, start) ;		\
> +	      (slot = radix_tree_next_chunk(root, iter, flags)) ; )

I don't think I understand this whole interface :(

The term "chunk" has not been defined anywhere in the code, which
doesn't help.

Neither radix_tree_for_each_chunk() nor
radix_tree_for_each_chunk_slot() get used anywhere in this patchset so
one can't go look at call sites to work out what they're for.

It's a strange iterator - it never terminates.  It requires that the
caller have an open-coded `break' in the search loop.

A bit more description and perhaps a usage example would help.

> +/**
> + * radix_tree_for_each_chunk_slot - iterate over slots in one chunk
> + *
> + * @slot:	the void** for pointer to slot
> + * @iter	the struct radix_tree_iter pointer
> + * @flags	RADIX_TREE_ITER_*
> + */
> +#define radix_tree_for_each_chunk_slot(slot, iter, flags)	\
> +	for ( ; slot ; slot = radix_tree_next_slot(slot, iter, flags) )

Similar observations here.

> +/**
> + * radix_tree_for_each_slot - iterate over all slots
> + *
> + * @slot:	the void** for pointer to slot
> + * @root	the struct radix_tree_root pointer
> + * @iter	the struct radix_tree_iter pointer
> + * @start	starting index
> + */
> +#define radix_tree_for_each_slot(slot, root, iter, start)	\
> +	for ( slot = radix_tree_iter_init(iter, start) ;	\
> +	      slot || (slot = radix_tree_next_chunk(root, iter, 0)) ; \
> +	      slot = radix_tree_next_slot(slot, iter, 0) )

All of these macros reference some of their arguments more than once. 
So wierd and wrong things will happen if they are invoked with an
expression-with-side-effects.  Also they lack parenthesisation, so

	radix_tree_for_each_slot(myslot + 1, ...)

won't compile.  The first problem is more serious than the second.

This is always a pain with complex macros and fixing it here would
deeply uglify the code.  It's unlikely that anyone will be invoking
these with expression-with-side-effects so I'd be inclined to just live
with the dangers.

otoh, someone *might* do

	radix_tree_for_each_slot(slot,
				 expensive_function_which_returns_a_root(),
				 iter, start);

and we'd call expensive_function_which_returns_a_root() each time
around the loop.  But I don't think this is fixable.

Anyway, have a think about it all.

> +/**
> + * radix_tree_for_each_contig - iterate over all contiguous slots

Now what does this mean?  Given a slot, iterate over that slot and all
contiguous successor slots until we encounter a hole?

Maybe.  Again, better interface descriptions are needed, please.

> + * @slot:	the void** for pointer to slot
> + * @root	the struct radix_tree_root pointer
> + * @iter	the struct radix_tree_iter pointer
> + * @start	starting index
> + */
> +#define radix_tree_for_each_contig(slot, root, iter, start)		\
> +	for ( slot = radix_tree_iter_init(iter, start) ;		\
> +	      slot || (slot = radix_tree_next_chunk(root, iter,		\
> +				RADIX_TREE_ITER_CONTIG)) ;		\
> +	      slot = radix_tree_next_slot(slot, iter,			\
> +				RADIX_TREE_ITER_CONTIG) )
> +
> +/**
> + * radix_tree_for_each_tagged - iterate over all tagged slots
> + *
> + * @slot:	the void** for pointer to slot
> + * @root	the struct radix_tree_root pointer
> + * @iter	the struct radix_tree_iter pointer
> + * @start	starting index
> + * @tag		tag index
> + */
> +#define radix_tree_for_each_tagged(slot, root, iter, start, tag)	\
> +	for ( slot = radix_tree_iter_init(iter, start) ;		\
> +	      slot || (slot = radix_tree_next_chunk(root, iter,		\
> +			      RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED | tag)) ;		\
> +	      slot = radix_tree_next_slot(slot, iter,			\
> +				RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED) )
> +
>  #endif /* _LINUX_RADIX_TREE_H */
> 
> ...
>
> +static inline unsigned long radix_tree_find_next_bit(const unsigned long *addr,
> +		unsigned long size, unsigned long offset)
> +{
> +	if (!__builtin_constant_p(size))
> +		return find_next_bit(addr, size, offset);
> +
> +	if (offset < size) {
> +		unsigned long tmp;
> +
> +		addr += offset / BITS_PER_LONG;
> +		tmp = *addr >> (offset % BITS_PER_LONG);
> +		if (tmp)
> +			return __ffs(tmp) + offset;
> +		offset = (offset + BITS_PER_LONG) & ~(BITS_PER_LONG - 1);
> +		while (offset < size) {
> +			tmp = *++addr;
> +			if (tmp)
> +				return __ffs(tmp) + offset;
> +			offset += BITS_PER_LONG;
> +		}
> +	}
> +	return size;
> +}

Beware that gcc will freely ignore your "inline" directive.

When I compiled it, gcc did appear to inline it.  Then I added
__always_inline and it was still inlined, but the text section in the
.o file got 20 bytes larger.  Odd.

>  /*
>   * This assumes that the caller has performed appropriate preallocation, and
>   * that the caller has pinned this thread of control to the current CPU.
> @@ -613,6 +649,117 @@ int radix_tree_tag_get(struct radix_tree_root *root,
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_tag_get);
>  
>  /**
> + * radix_tree_next_chunk - find next chunk of slots for iteration
> + *
> + * @root:		radix tree root
> + * @iter:		iterator state
> + * @flags		RADIX_TREE_ITER_* flags and tag index
> + *
> + * Returns pointer to first slots in chunk, or NULL if there no more left
> + */
> +void **radix_tree_next_chunk(struct radix_tree_root *root,
> +			     struct radix_tree_iter *iter, unsigned flags)
> +{
> +	unsigned shift, tag = flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAG_MASK;
> +	struct radix_tree_node *rnode, *node;
> +	unsigned long i, index;

When a c programmer sees a variable called "i", he solidly expects it
to have type "int".  Please choose a better name for this guy! 
Perferably something which helps the reader understand what the
variable's role is.

> +	if ((flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED) && !root_tag_get(root, tag))
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Catch next_index overflow after ~0UL.
> +	 * iter->index can be zero only at the beginning.
> +	 * Because RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT < BITS_PER_LONG we cannot
> +	 * oveflow iter->next_index in single step.
> +	 */
> +	index = iter->next_index;
> +	if (!index && iter->index)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	rnode = rcu_dereference_raw(root->rnode);
> +	if (radix_tree_is_indirect_ptr(rnode)) {
> +		rnode = indirect_to_ptr(rnode);
> +	} else if (rnode && !index) {
> +		/* Single-slot tree */
> +		iter->index = 0;
> +		iter->next_index = 1;
> +		iter->tags = 1;
> +		return (void **)&root->rnode;
> +	} else
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +restart:
> +	shift = (rnode->height - 1) * RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT;
> +	i = index >> shift;
> +
> +	/* Index ouside of the tree */
> +	if (i >= RADIX_TREE_MAP_SIZE)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	node = rnode;
> +	while (1) {
> +		if ((flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED) ?
> +				!test_bit(i, node->tags[tag]) :
> +				!node->slots[i]) {
> +			/* Hole detected */
> +			if (flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_CONTIG)
> +				return NULL;
> +
> +			if (flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED)
> +				i = radix_tree_find_next_bit(node->tags[tag],
> +						RADIX_TREE_MAP_SIZE, i + 1);
> +			else
> +				while (++i < RADIX_TREE_MAP_SIZE &&
> +						!node->slots[i]);
> +
> +			index &= ~((RADIX_TREE_MAP_SIZE << shift) - 1);
> +			index += i << shift;
> +			/* Overflow after ~0UL */
> +			if (!index)
> +				return NULL;
> +			if (i == RADIX_TREE_MAP_SIZE)
> +				goto restart;
> +		}
> +
> +		/* This is leaf-node */
> +		if (!shift)
> +			break;
> +
> +		node = rcu_dereference_raw(node->slots[i]);
> +		if (node == NULL)
> +			goto restart;
> +		shift -= RADIX_TREE_MAP_SHIFT;
> +		i = (index >> shift) & RADIX_TREE_MAP_MASK;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Update the iterator state */
> +	iter->index = index;
> +	iter->next_index = (index | RADIX_TREE_MAP_MASK) + 1;
> +
> +	/* Construct iter->tags bitmask from node->tags[tag] array */
> +	if (flags & RADIX_TREE_ITER_TAGGED) {
> +		unsigned tag_long, tag_bit;
> +
> +		tag_long = i / BITS_PER_LONG;
> +		tag_bit  = i % BITS_PER_LONG;
> +		iter->tags = node->tags[tag][tag_long] >> tag_bit;
> +		/* This never happens if RADIX_TREE_TAG_LONGS == 1 */
> +		if (tag_long < RADIX_TREE_TAG_LONGS - 1) {
> +			/* Pick tags from next element */
> +			if (tag_bit)
> +				iter->tags |= node->tags[tag][tag_long + 1] <<
> +						(BITS_PER_LONG - tag_bit);
> +			/* Clip chunk size, here only BITS_PER_LONG tags */
> +			iter->next_index = index + BITS_PER_LONG;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return node->slots + i;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(radix_tree_next_chunk);
> +
> +/**
>   * radix_tree_range_tag_if_tagged - for each item in given range set given
>   *				   tag if item has another tag set
>   * @root:		radix tree root
--
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