linux-kernel - [PATCH rcu 02/14] refscale: Optimize process

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <20240816070256.60993-2-neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 12:32:44 +0530
From: neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org
To: rcu@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...a.com,
	rostedt@...dmis.org,
	paulmck@...nel.org,
	neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org,
	neeraj.upadhyay@....com,
	boqun.feng@...il.com,
	joel@...lfernandes.org,
	urezki@...il.com,
	frederic@...nel.org,
	Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: [PATCH rcu 02/14] refscale: Optimize process_durations()

From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>

process_durations() is not a hot path, but there is no good reason to
iterate over and over the data already in 'buf'.

Using a seq_buf saves some useless strcat() and the need of a temp buffer.
Data is written directly at the correct place.

Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Tested-by: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/rcu/refscale.c | 25 ++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/rcu/refscale.c b/kernel/rcu/refscale.c
index f4ea5b1ec068..cfec0648e141 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/refscale.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/refscale.c
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
 #include <linux/rcupdate_trace.h>
 #include <linux/reboot.h>
 #include <linux/sched.h>
+#include <linux/seq_buf.h>
 #include <linux/spinlock.h>
 #include <linux/smp.h>
 #include <linux/stat.h>
@@ -891,32 +892,34 @@ static u64 process_durations(int n)
 {
 	int i;
 	struct reader_task *rt;
-	char buf1[64];
+	struct seq_buf s;
 	char *buf;
 	u64 sum = 0;
 
 	buf = kmalloc(800 + 64, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!buf)
 		return 0;
-	buf[0] = 0;
-	sprintf(buf, "Experiment #%d (Format: <THREAD-NUM>:<Total loop time in ns>)",
-		exp_idx);
+	seq_buf_init(&s, buf, 800 + 64);
+
+	seq_buf_printf(&s, "Experiment #%d (Format: <THREAD-NUM>:<Total loop time in ns>)",
+		       exp_idx);
 
 	for (i = 0; i < n && !torture_must_stop(); i++) {
 		rt = &(reader_tasks[i]);
-		sprintf(buf1, "%d: %llu\t", i, rt->last_duration_ns);
 
 		if (i % 5 == 0)
-			strcat(buf, "\n");
-		if (strlen(buf) >= 800) {
-			pr_alert("%s", buf);
-			buf[0] = 0;
+			seq_buf_putc(&s, '\n');
+
+		if (seq_buf_used(&s) >= 800) {
+			pr_alert("%s", seq_buf_str(&s));
+			seq_buf_clear(&s);
 		}
-		strcat(buf, buf1);
+
+		seq_buf_printf(&s, "%d: %llu\t", i, rt->last_duration_ns);
 
 		sum += rt->last_duration_ns;
 	}
-	pr_alert("%s\n", buf);
+	pr_alert("%s\n", seq_buf_str(&s));
 
 	kfree(buf);
 	return sum;
-- 
2.40.1