[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALOAHbAfWkAYJPTRfyPmHKSmg7UEhtnamzUVx9xd4oYkqi_x8g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2018 23:02:19 +0800
From: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
To: willy@...radead.org
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/filemap.c: minor optimization in write_iter file operation
On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 8:13 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 08:02:18PM +0800, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > This little adjustment on bitwise operation could make the code a little
> > faster.
> > As write_iter is used in lots of critical path, so this code change is
> > useful for performance.
>
> Did you check the before/after code generation with this patch applied?
>
Yes, I did.
My oompiler is gcc-4.8.5, a litte old, and with CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE on.
The output file is differrent.
> $ diff -u before.S after.S
> --- before.S 2018-11-18 07:11:48.031096768 -0500
> +++ after.S 2018-11-18 07:11:36.883069103 -0500
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>
> -before.o: file format elf32-i386
> +after.o: file format elf32-i386
>
>
> Disassembly of section .text:
>
> with gcc 8.2.0, I see no difference, indicating that the compiler already
> makes this optimisation.
Could pls. try set CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE on and then compare them again ?
Thanks
Yafang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists