LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@mailshack.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	heukelum@fastmail.fm
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Change x86 to use generic find_next_bit
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 21:10:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080309201016.GA28454@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080309200103.GA895@mailshack.com>


* Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@mailshack.com> wrote:

> x86: Change x86 to use the generic find_next_bit implementation
> 
> The versions with inline assembly are in fact slower on the machines I 
> tested them on (in userspace) (Athlon XP 2800+, p4-like Xeon 2.8GHz, 
> AMD Opteron 270). The i386-version needed a fix similar to 06024f21 to 
> avoid crashing the benchmark.
> 
> Benchmark using: gcc -fomit-frame-pointer -Os. For each bitmap size 
> 1...512, for each possible bitmap with one bit set, for each possible 
> offset: find the position of the first bit starting at offset. If you 
> follow ;). Times include setup of the bitmap and checking of the 
> results.
> 
> 		Athlon		Xeon		Opteron 32/64bit
> x86-specific:	0m3.692s	0m2.820s	0m3.196s / 0m2.480s
> generic:	0m2.622s	0m1.662s	0m2.100s / 0m1.572s

ok, that's rather convincing.

the generic version in lib/find_next_bit.c is open-coded C which gcc can 
optimize pretty nicely.

the hand-coded assembly versions in arch/x86/lib/bitops_32.c mostly use 
the special x86 'bit search forward' (BSF) instruction - which i know 
from the days when the scheduler relied on it has some non-trivial setup 
costs. So especially when there's _small_ bitmasks involved, it's more 
expensive.

> If the bitmap size is not a multiple of BITS_PER_LONG, and no set 
> (cleared) bit is found, find_next_bit (find_next_zero_bit) returns a 
> value outside of the range [0,size]. The generic version always 
> returns exactly size. The generic version also uses unsigned long 
> everywhere, while the x86 versions use a mishmash of int, unsigned 
> (int), long and unsigned long.

i'm not surprised that the hand-coded assembly versions had a bug ...

[ this means we have to test it quite carefully though, as lots of code 
  only ever gets tested on x86 so code could have built dependency on 
  the buggy behavior. ]

> Using the generic version does give a slightly bigger kernel, though.
> 
> defconfig:	   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
> x86-specific:	4738555  481232  626688 5846475  5935cb vmlinux (32 bit)
> generic:	4738621  481232  626688 5846541  59360d vmlinux (32 bit)
> x86-specific:	5392395  846568  724424 6963387  6a40bb vmlinux (64 bit)
> generic:	5392458  846568  724424 6963450  6a40fa vmlinux (64 bit)

i'd not worry about that too much. Have you tried to build with:

  CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y
  CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING=y

(the latter only available in x86.git)

> Patch is against -x86#testing. It compiles.

i've picked it up into x86.git, lets see how it goes in practice.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2008-03-09 20:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-09 20:01 Alexander van Heukelum
2008-03-09 20:10 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-03-09 21:03   ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-09 21:32     ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-09 21:13   ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-03-10  6:29     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-09 20:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-09 20:31   ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-03-09 20:51     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-09 21:29       ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-10 23:17       ` [RFC/PATCH] x86: Optimize find_next_(zero_)bit for small constant-size bitmaps Alexander van Heukelum
2008-03-11  9:56         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-03-11 15:17           ` [PATCH] " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-03-11 15:22             ` [RFC] non-x86: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-03-11 15:23             ` [PATCH] x86: " Ingo Molnar
2008-03-09 20:28 ` [PATCH] x86: Change x86 to use generic find_next_bit Andi Kleen
2008-03-09 21:31 ` Andi Kleen
2008-03-13 12:44 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2008-03-13 14:27   ` Alexander van Heukelum

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080309201016.GA28454@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=heukelum@fastmail.fm \
    --cc=heukelum@mailshack.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] x86: Change x86 to use generic find_next_bit' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).