From: Jürgen Groß > Sent: 24 July 2024 09:14 > > On 23.07.24 23:59, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > Arnd reported a significant build slowdown [0], which was bisected to the > > series spanning commit 80fcac55385c ("minmax: relax check to allow > > comparison between unsigned arguments and signed constants") to commit > > 867046cc70277 ("minmax: relax check to allow comparison between unsigned > > arguments and signed constants"), originating from the series "minmax: > > Relax type checks in min() and max()." [1]. > > > > I have reproduced this locally, reverting this series and manually fixing > > up all call sites that invoke min()/max() for a simple x86-64 defconfig (+ > > some other debug flags I use for debug kernels, I can provide the .config > > if needed). > > > > Arnd noted that the arch/x86/xen/setup.c file was particularly problematic, > > taking 15 (!) seconds to pre-process on his machine, so I also enabled > > CONFIG_XEN to test this and obtained performance numbers with this set/not > > set. > > > > I was able to reproduce this very significant pre-processor time on this > > file, noting that with the series reverted compile time for the file is > > 0.79s, with it in place, it takes 6.90s for a 873.4% slowdown. ... > > Which suggests a worryingly significant slowdown of ~45s with CONFIG_XEN > > enabled and ~35s even without it. > > > > The underlying problems seems to be very large macro expansions, which Arnd > > noted in the xen case originated from the line: > > > > extra_pages = min3(EXTRA_MEM_RATIO * min(max_pfn, PFN_DOWN(MAXMEM)), > > extra_pages, max_pages - max_pfn); Jeepers, that is definitely going to be big - it never was small. The expansion of min() itself isn't that bad. But both arguments get expanded a few times (and a few more than the old code). So a nested min/max causes an O(n^2) expansion - livable. But min3(a,b,c) is just min(min(a,b),c) - so a nested call. (It seems to have been added to avoid the cost of the nested call, but just implemented a nested call anyway.) Here one of the arguments to min3() is a min() - and I suspect it goes into the inner min() so O(n^3) - which is bad news. > > > > And resulted in the generation of 47 MB (!) of pre-processor output. > > > > It seems a lot of code now relies on the relaxed conditions of the newly > > changed min/max() macros, so the question is - what can we do to address > > these regressions? > > I can send a patch to simplify the problematic construct, but OTOH this > will avoid only one particularly bad example. I suspect that reversing the order of the args to min3() will help this case. There is an updated patch set I sent in January that reduces the expansion a bit. I've a reworked version that removes the last few patches (removing support for constant output and using MIN() for that instead). I'll repost it and maybe Arnd will pick it up? David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)