linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] cpumask: improve on cpumask_local

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: <Y5D7VvNIG8AKXuC6@yury-laptop>
Date:   Wed, 7 Dec 2022 12:45:10 -0800
From:   Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
To:     Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com>
Cc:     Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
        haniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] cpumask: improve on cpumask_local_spread()
 locality

On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 02:53:58PM +0200, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/30/2022 3:47 AM, Yury Norov wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 08:39:24AM +0200, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 11/17/2022 2:23 PM, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> > > > On 15/11/22 10:32, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 05:24:56PM +0000, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Is this meant as a replacement for [1]?
> > > > > 
> > > > > No. Your series adds an iterator, and in my experience the code that
> > > > > uses iterators of that sort is almost always better and easier to
> > > > > understand than cpumask_nth() or cpumask_next()-like users.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My series has the only advantage that it allows keep existing codebase
> > > > > untouched.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Right
> > > > 
> > > > > > I like that this is changing an existing interface so that all current
> > > > > > users directly benefit from the change. Now, about half of the users of
> > > > > > cpumask_local_spread() use it in a loop with incremental @i parameter,
> > > > > > which makes the repeated bsearch a bit of a shame, but then I'm tempted to
> > > > > > say the first point makes it worth it.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221028164959.1367250-1-vschneid@redhat.com/
> > > > > 
> > > > > In terms of very common case of sequential invocation of local_spread()
> > > > > for cpus from 0 to nr_cpu_ids, the complexity of my approach is n * log n,
> > > > > and your approach is amortized O(n), which is better. Not a big deal _now_,
> > > > > as you mentioned in the other email. But we never know how things will
> > > > > evolve, right?
> > > > > 
> > > > > So, I would take both and maybe in comment to cpumask_local_spread()
> > > > > mention that there's a better alternative for those who call the
> > > > > function for all CPUs incrementally.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Ack, sounds good.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Good.
> > > Is a respin needed, to add the comment mentioned above?
> > 
> > If you think it's worth the effort.
> 
> No, not sure it is...
> 
> I asked because this mail thread was inactive for a while, with the patches
> not accepted to the kernel yet.
> 
> If everyone is happy with it, let's make it to this kernel while possible.
> 
> To which tree should it go?

I've got bitmap tree and can move it there, but this series is related to
scheduler and NUMA as well, and I'd prefer move it in those trees.

If moving through bitmaps, I'd like to collect more reviews and testing.

Thanks,
Yury