Re: [PATCH] lib: Make _find_next_bit helper function inline

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 24.08.2015 01:53, Alexey Klimov wrote:
Hi Cassidy,


On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Cassidy Burden <cburden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I changed the test module to now set the entire array to all 0/1s and
only flip a few bits. There appears to be a performance benefit, but
it's only 2-3% better (if that). If the main benefit of the original
patch was to save space then inlining definitely doesn't seem worth the
small gains in real use cases.

find_next_zero_bit (us)
old      new     inline
14440    17080   17086
4779     5181    5069
10844    12720   12746
9642     11312   11253
3858     3818    3668
10540    12349   12307
12470    14716   14697
5403     6002    5942
2282     1820    1418
13632    16056   15998
11048    13019   13030
6025     6790    6706
13255    15586   15605
3038     2744    2539
10353    12219   12239
10498    12251   12322
14767    17452   17454
12785    15048   15052
1655     1034    691
9924     11611   11558

find_next_bit (us)
old      new     inline
8535     9936    9667
14666    17372   16880
2315     1799    1355
6578     9092    8806
6548     7558    7274
9448     11213   10821
3467     3497    3449
2719     3079    2911
6115     7989    7796
13582    16113   15643
4643     4946    4766
3406     3728    3536
7118     9045    8805
3174     3011    2701
13300    16780   16252
14285    16848   16330
11583    13669   13207
13063    15455   14989
12661    14955   14500
12068    14166   13790

On 7/29/2015 6:30 AM, Alexey Klimov wrote:

I will re-check on another machine. It's really interesting if
__always_inline makes things better for aarch64 and worse for x86_64. It
will be nice if someone will check it on x86_64 too.


Very odd, this may be related to the other compiler optimizations Yuri
mentioned?

It's better to ask Yury, i hope he can answer some day.

Do you need to re-check this (with more iterations or on another machine(s))?


Hi, Alexey, Cassidy,

(restoring Rasmus, George)

I found no difference between original and inline versions for x86_64:
(Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2630QM CPU @ 2.00GHz)

find_next_bit		find_next_zero_bit
old	new	inline	old	new	inline
24	27	28	22	28	28
24	27	28      23	27	28
24	27	28      23	27	28
          	
Inspecting assembler code, I found that GCC wants to see helper separated,
even if you provide '__always_inline':

inline <find_next_bit_new>:			current <find_next_bit_new>:			
280:	cmp    %rdx,%rsi                        210:	cmp    %rdx,%rsi
283:	jbe    295 <find_next_bit_new+0x15>     213:	jbe    227 <find_next_bit_new+0x17>
285:	test   %rsi,%rsi                        215:	test   %rsi,%rsi
288:	je     295 <find_next_bit_new+0x15>     218:	je     227 <find_next_bit_new+0x17>
28a:	push   %rbp                             21a:	push   %rbp
28b:	mov    %rsp,%rbp                        21b:	xor    %ecx,%ecx
28e:	callq  0 <find_next_bit_new.part.0>     21d:	mov    %rsp,%rbp
293:	pop    %rbp                             220:	callq  0 <_find_next_bit.part.0>
294:	retq                                    225:	pop    %rbp
295:	mov    %rsi,%rax                        226:	retq
298:	retq                                    227:	mov    %rsi,%rax
299:	nopl   0x0(%rax)                        22a:	retq
      				                22b:	nopl   0x0(%rax,%rax,1)

So things are looking like x86_64 gcc (at least 4.9.2 build for Ubuntu)
ignores '__always_inline' hint as well as 'inline'. But in case of
__always_inline compiler does something not really smart: it introduces
<find_next_bit_new.part.0> and <find_next_zero_bit_new.part.1> helpers
and so increases text size from 0x250 to 0x2b9 bytes, but doesn't really
inline to optimize push/pop and call/ret. I don't like inline, as I
already told, but I believe that complete disabling is bad idea.
Maybe someone knows another trick to make inline work?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux