[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YyswUKLcRiuRoUrn@yury-laptop>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2022 08:40:00 -0700
From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Alexey Klimov <klimov.linux@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] lib: optimize find_bit() functions
If no other comments, I'll address Andy's comments on formatting and
move it in bitmap-for-next.
Thanks,
Yury
On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 07:07:26PM -0700, Yury Norov wrote:
> In the recent discussion, it was noticed that find_next_bit() functions may
> be improved by adding wrappers around common __find_next_bit() in .c file.
>
> As suggested by Linus, I tried the meta-programming trick with the
> EXPRESSION macro, which is passed from wrapper into find_bit()
> helpers:
>
> #define BIT_FIND_BODY(addr, size, start, EXPRESSION) \
> BIT_FIND_SETUP(addr, size, start) \
> BIT_FIND_FIRST_WORD(addr, size, start, EXPRESSION) \
> BIT_WORD_LOOP(addr, size, idx, val, EXPRESSION) \
> return size; \
> found: BIT_WORD_SWAB(val); \
> return min((idx)*BITS_PER_LONG + __ffs(val), size)
>
> unsigned long _find_next_and_bit(const unsigned long *addr1,
> const unsigned long *addr2,
> unsigned long size,
> unsigned long start)
> { BIT_FIND_BODY(addr, size, start, addr1[idx] & addr2[idx]); }
>
> I appreciated the potential of how the EXPRESSION works, but I don't like
> that the resulting macro is constructed from pieces because it makes it
> harder to understand what happens behind the ifdefery. Checkpatch isn't
> happy as well because the final macro contains 'return' statement; and I
> would agree that it's better to avoid it.
>
> I spun the idea one more time, trying to make FIND helper a more or
> less standard looking macro.
>
> This new approach saves 10-11K of Image size, and is 15% faster in the
> performance benchmark. See the 3rd patch for some statistics.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220728161208.865420-2-yury.norov@gmail.com/T/
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YwaXvphVpy5A7fSs@yury-laptop/t/
> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/xhsmhedwnb15r.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb/T/
> v4:
> - fix for-loop break condition in FIND_NEXT_BIT;
> - add review tags from Valentin Schneider.
>
> Yury Norov (4):
> lib/find_bit: introduce FIND_FIRST_BIT() macro
> lib/find_bit: create find_first_zero_bit_le()
> lib/find_bit: optimize find_next_bit() functions
> tools: sync find_bit() implementation
>
> include/linux/find.h | 46 +++++++---
> lib/find_bit.c | 178 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> tools/include/linux/find.h | 61 +++----------
> tools/lib/find_bit.c | 149 ++++++++++++++-----------------
> 4 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 214 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists