Hello Mathieu,
nice to hear someone is concerned about space.
since you plan to go for uint perhaps we can drop that bitfield stuff at all ?
re,
wh
Am 01.12.2011 15:20, schrieb Mathieu Desnoyers:
> * walter harms (wharms@xxxxxx) wrote:
>> hi,
>> This patch looks ok to me but this design is ugly by itself.
>> It should be replaced by an uchar uint whatever or use a
>> real bool (obviously not preferred by this programmes).
>
> bool :1, uchar :1 or uint :1 could make sense. uchar:1/bool:1 won't save
> any space here, because the surrounding fields are either uint or
> pointers, so alignment will just add padding.
>
> I try to use int/uint whenever possible because x86 CPUs tend to get
> less register false-dependencies when using instructions modifying the
> whole register (generated by using int/uint types) rather than only part
> of it (uchar/char/bool). I only use char/uchar/bool when there is a
> clear wanted space gain.
>
> The reason why I never use the bool type within a structure when I want
> a compact representation is that bool takes a whole byte just to
> represent one bit:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdbool.h>
>
> struct usebitfield {
> int a;
> unsigned int f:1, g:1, h:1, i:1, j:1;
> int b;
> };
>
> struct usebool {
> int a;
> bool f, g, h, i, j;
> int b;
> };
>
> struct useboolbf {
> int a;
> bool f:1, g:1, h:1, i:1, j:1;
> int b;
> };
>
> int main()
> {
> printf("bitfield %d bytes, bool %d bytes, boolbitfield %d bytes\n",
> sizeof(struct usebitfield), sizeof(struct usebool),
> sizeof(struct useboolbf));
> }
>
> result:
>
> bitfield 12 bytes, bool 16 bytes, boolbitfield 12 bytes
>
> This is because each bool takes one byte, while the bitfields are put in
> units of "unsigned int" (or bool for the 3rd struct). So in this
> example, we need 5 bytes + 3 bytes alignment for the bool, but only 4
> bytes to hold the "unsigned int" unit for the bitfields.
>
> The choice between bool and bitfields must also take into account the
> frequency of access to the variable, because bitfields require mask
> operations to access the selected bit(s). You will notice that none of
> these bitfields are accessed on the tracing fast-path: only in
> slow-paths. Therefore, space gain is more important than speed here.
>
> One might argue that I have so few of these fields here that it does not
> make an actual difference to go for bitfield or bool. I am just trying
> to choose types best suited for their intended purpose, ensuring they
> are future-proof and will allow simply adding more fields using the same
> type, as needed.
>
> So I guess I'll go for uint :1.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mathieu
>
>>
>> re,
>> wh
>>
>> Am 01.12.2011 10:37, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
>>> Sparse complains that these signed bitfields look "dubious". The
>>> problem is that instead of being either 0 or 1 like people would expect,
>>> signed one bit variables like this are either 0 or -1. It doesn't cause
>>> a problem in this case but it's ugly so lets fix them.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> I just did this against linux next but it applies fine on top of
>>> Mathieu's recent patches.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/backend_types.h b/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/backend_types.h
>>> index 1d301de..019929a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/backend_types.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/backend_types.h
>>> @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ struct channel_backend {
>>> * for writer.
>>> */
>>> unsigned int buf_size_order; /* Order of buffer size */
>>> - int extra_reader_sb:1; /* Bool: has extra reader subbuffer */
>>> + unsigned int extra_reader_sb:1; /* Bool: has extra reader subbuffer */
>>> struct lib_ring_buffer *buf; /* Channel per-cpu buffers */
>>>
>>> unsigned long num_subbuf; /* Number of sub-buffers for writer */
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/frontend_types.h b/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/frontend_types.h
>>> index 5c7437f..9086c58 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/frontend_types.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/lttng/lib/ringbuffer/frontend_types.h
>>> @@ -60,8 +60,8 @@ struct channel {
>>> struct notifier_block cpu_hp_notifier; /* CPU hotplug notifier */
>>> struct notifier_block tick_nohz_notifier; /* CPU nohz notifier */
>>> struct notifier_block hp_iter_notifier; /* hotplug iterator notifier */
>>> - int cpu_hp_enable:1; /* Enable CPU hotplug notif. */
>>> - int hp_iter_enable:1; /* Enable hp iter notif. */
>>> + unsigned int cpu_hp_enable:1; /* Enable CPU hotplug notif. */
>>> + unsigned int hp_iter_enable:1; /* Enable hp iter notif. */
>>> wait_queue_head_t read_wait; /* reader wait queue */
>>> wait_queue_head_t hp_wait; /* CPU hotplug wait queue */
>>> int finalized; /* Has channel been finalized */
>>> @@ -94,8 +94,8 @@ struct lib_ring_buffer_iter {
>>> ITER_NEXT_RECORD,
>>> ITER_PUT_SUBBUF,
>>> } state;
>>> - int allocated:1;
>>> - int read_open:1; /* Opened for reading ? */
>>> + unsigned int allocated:1;
>>> + unsigned int read_open:1; /* Opened for reading ? */
>>> };
>>>
>>> /* ring buffer state */
>>> @@ -138,9 +138,9 @@ struct lib_ring_buffer {
>>> unsigned long get_subbuf_consumed; /* Read-side consumed */
>>> unsigned long prod_snapshot; /* Producer count snapshot */
>>> unsigned long cons_snapshot; /* Consumer count snapshot */
>>> - int get_subbuf:1; /* Sub-buffer being held by reader */
>>> - int switch_timer_enabled:1; /* Protected by ring_buffer_nohz_lock */
>>> - int read_timer_enabled:1; /* Protected by ring_buffer_nohz_lock */
>>> + unsigned int get_subbuf:1; /* Sub-buffer being held by reader */
>>> + unsigned int switch_timer_enabled:1; /* Protected by ring_buffer_nohz_lock */
>>> + unsigned int read_timer_enabled:1; /* Protected by ring_buffer_nohz_lock */
>>> };
>>>
>>> static inline
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lttng/ltt-events.h b/drivers/staging/lttng/ltt-events.h
>>> index 36b281a..3fc355d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/lttng/ltt-events.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/lttng/ltt-events.h
>>> @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ struct ltt_event {
>>> } ftrace;
>>> } u;
>>> struct list_head list; /* Event list */
>>> - int metadata_dumped:1;
>>> + unsigned int metadata_dumped:1;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct ltt_channel_ops {
>>> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ struct ltt_channel {
>>> struct ltt_event *sc_compat_unknown;
>>> struct ltt_event *sc_exit; /* for syscall exit */
>>> int header_type; /* 0: unset, 1: compact, 2: large */
>>> - int metadata_dumped:1;
>>> + unsigned int metadata_dumped:1;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct ltt_session {
>>> @@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ struct ltt_session {
>>> struct list_head list; /* Session list */
>>> unsigned int free_chan_id; /* Next chan ID to allocate */
>>> uuid_le uuid; /* Trace session unique ID */
>>> - int metadata_dumped:1;
>>> + unsigned int metadata_dumped:1;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct ltt_session *ltt_session_create(void);
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>>>
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
