[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMZfGtUQOXmuRumv48MYGCYh_JZn4bMPPz8HW2ExgTPCfFMMnw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 20:14:18 +0800
From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...nel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, paulmck@...nel.org,
mchehab+huawei@...nel.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, oneukum@...e.com,
anshuman.khandual@....com, jroedel@...e.de,
Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
"Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Xiongchun duan <duanxiongchun@...edance.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v8 12/12] mm/hugetlb: Optimize the code
with the help of the compiler
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:39 PM Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de> wrote:
>
> On 2020-12-10 04:55, Muchun Song wrote:
> > We cannot optimize if a "struct page" crosses page boundaries. If
> > it is true, we can optimize the code with the help of a compiler.
> > When free_vmemmap_pages_per_hpage() returns zero, most functions are
> > optimized by the compiler.
>
> As I said earlier, I would squash this patch with patch#10 and
> remove the !is_power_of_2 check in hugetlb_vmemmap_init and leave
> only the check for the boot parameter.
> That should be enough.
Yeah, you are right. I just want the compiler to do optimization.
>
> > static inline bool is_hugetlb_free_vmemmap_enabled(void)
> > {
> > - return hugetlb_free_vmemmap_enabled;
> > + return hugetlb_free_vmemmap_enabled &&
> > + is_power_of_2(sizeof(struct page));
>
> Why? hugetlb_free_vmemmap_enabled can only become true
> if the is_power_of_2 check succeeds in early_hugetlb_free_vmemmap_param.
> The "is_power_of_2" check here can go.
>
> > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.h b/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.h
> > index 0a1c0d33a316..5f5e90c81cd2 100644
> > --- a/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.h
> > +++ b/mm/hugetlb_vmemmap.h
> > @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ void free_huge_page_vmemmap(struct hstate *h, struct
> > page *head);
> > */
> > static inline unsigned int free_vmemmap_pages_per_hpage(struct hstate
> > *h)
> > {
> > - return h->nr_free_vmemmap_pages;
> > + return h->nr_free_vmemmap_pages && is_power_of_2(sizeof(struct
> > page));
>
> If hugetlb_free_vmemmap_enabled is false, hugetlb_vmemmap_init() leaves
> h->nr_free_vmemmap_pages unset to 0, so no need for the is_power_of_2
> check here.
Yeah, you are right. But if we do this check can make the code simple.
For example, here is a code snippet.
void func(void)
{
if (free_vmemmap_pages_per_hpage())
return;
/* Do something */
}
With this patch, the func will be optimized to null when is_power_of_2
returns false.
void func(void)
{
}
Without this patch, the compiler cannot do this optimization.
Thanks.
>
>
> --
> Oscar Salvador
> SUSE L3
--
Yours,
Muchun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists