[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ef68a1ece1a2db3dca73c326f65304fd640c6a7e.camel@perches.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2021 11:05:54 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Cassio Neri <cassio.neri@...il.com>, john.stultz@...aro.org,
tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: sboyd@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] kernel/time: Improve performance of time64_to_tm.
Add tests.
On Wed, 2021-06-02 at 18:46 +0100, Cassio Neri wrote:
> The current implementation of time64_to_tm contains unnecessary loops,
> branches and look-up tables. The new one uses an arithmetic-based algorithm
> appeared in [1] and is ~3.2 times faster (YMMV).
trivia:
> diff --git a/kernel/time/timeconv.c b/kernel/time/timeconv.c
[]
> void time64_to_tm(time64_t totalsecs, int offset, struct tm *result)
> {
> - long days, rem, y;
> + long days, rem;
> int remainder;
> - const unsigned short *ip;
> +
> + u64 u64tmp, udays, century, year;
> + u32 u32tmp, day_of_century, year_of_century, day_of_year, month,
> + day, janOrFeb, is_leap;
janOrFeb is an odd name choice and it and is_leap could be bool
which _might_ improve performance in some memory access cases.
> + year_of_century = (u32) (u64tmp >> 32);
Perhaps
year_of_century = upper_32_bits(u64tmp);
> + day_of_year = ((u32) u64tmp) / 2939745 / 4;
and
day_of_year = lower_32_bits(u64tmp) / 2939745 / 4;
> + is_leap = year_of_century != 0 ?
> + year_of_century % 4 == 0 : century % 4 == 0;
> +
> + u32tmp = 2141 * day_of_year + 132377;
> + month = u32tmp >> 16;
> + day = ((u16) u32tmp) / 2141;
> +
> + /* Recall that January 01 is the 306-th day of the year in the
> + * computational (not Gregorian) calendar.
> + */
> + janOrFeb = day_of_year >= 306;
> +
> + /* Converts to the Gregorian calendar and adjusts to Unix time. */
> + year = year + janOrFeb - 6313183731940000ULL;
> + month = janOrFeb ? month - 12 : month;
> + day = day + 1;
> + day_of_year = janOrFeb ?
> + day_of_year - 306 : day_of_year + 31 + 28 + is_leap;
I believe the extended naming improves readability, thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists