> -----Original Message----- > From: Rasmus Villemoes [mailto:li...@rasmusvillemoes.dk] > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 5:34 PM > To: Andrew Morton > Cc: Wang, Yalin; 'Kirill A. Shutemov'; 'a...@arndb.de'; 'linux- > a...@vger.kernel.org'; 'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'; > 'li...@arm.linux.org.uk'; 'linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org' > Subject: Re: [RFC] change non-atomic bitops method > > On Tue, Feb 03 2015, Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > > You aren't measuring the right thing. You should compare > > > > if (p[i] != x) > > p[i] = x; > > > > versus > > > > p[i] = x; > > > > and you should do this for two cases: > > > > a) p[i] == x > > > > b) p[i] != x > > > > > > The first code sequence will be slower when (p[i] != x) and faster when > > (p[i] == x). > > > > > > Next, we should instrument the kernel to work out the frequency of > > set_bit on an already-set bit. > > > > It is only with both these ratios that we can work out whether the > > patch is a net gain. My suspicion is that set_bit on an already-set > > bit is so rare that the patch will be a loss. > > There's also the code-bloat issue to consider (instruction cache and all > that); the conditional versions will usually require three extra > instructions and an extra register. Also, the cache line might already > be dirty because of something in the surrounding code. Instruction cache > misses and larger stack footprint (from larger register pressure) won't > show up in a microbenchmark, so I think this needs a real-world example > to justify. > > But even if one finds some hot spot that would benefit from the > conditional, that should simply be added explicitly there, instead of > pessimizing every other user. (A good example of that is 358eec18243a > ("vfs: decrapify dput(), fix cache behavior under normal load")).
Oh, thank you, it is really a very nice example. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
