linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 11/17] find: micro-optimize for_each_{set,clear}

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YSeduU41Ef568xhS@alley>
Date:   Thu, 26 Aug 2021 15:57:13 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@...me>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Alexey Klimov <aklimov@...hat.com>,
        Andrea Merello <andrea.merello@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Brian Cain <bcain@...eaurora.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        Samuel Mendoza-Jonas <sam@...dozajonas.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/17] find: micro-optimize for_each_{set,clear}_bit()

On Sat 2021-08-14 14:17:07, Yury Norov wrote:
> The macros iterate thru all set/clear bits in a bitmap. They search a
> first bit using find_first_bit(), and the rest bits using find_next_bit().
> 
> Since find_next_bit() is called shortly after find_first_bit(), we can
> save few lines of I-cache by not using find_first_bit().

Is this only a speculation or does it fix a real performance problem?

The macro is used like:

	for_each_set_bit(bit, addr, size) {
		fn(bit);
	}

IMHO, the micro-opimization does not help when fn() is non-trivial.


> --- a/include/linux/find.h
> +++ b/include/linux/find.h
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ unsigned long find_next_bit_le(const void *addr, unsigned
>  #endif
>  
>  #define for_each_set_bit(bit, addr, size) \
> -	for ((bit) = find_first_bit((addr), (size));		\
> +	for ((bit) = find_next_bit((addr), (size), 0);		\
>  	     (bit) < (size);					\
>  	     (bit) = find_next_bit((addr), (size), (bit) + 1))
>  

It is not a big deal. I just think that the original code is slightly
more self-explaining.

Best Regards,
Petr