From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: "Wang, Yalin" <Yalin.Wang@sonymobile.com>
Cc: "'arnd@arndb.de'" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"'linux-arch@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'linux@arm.linux.org.uk'" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"'linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org'"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] change non-atomic bitops method
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 20:31:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150202193154.GC10842@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35FD53F367049845BC99AC72306C23D1044A02027E0A@CNBJMBX05.corpusers.net>
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 11:55:03AM +0800, Wang, Yalin wrote:
> This patch change non-atomic bitops,
> add a if() condition to test it, before set/clear the bit.
> so that we don't need dirty the cache line, if this bit
> have been set or clear. On SMP system, dirty cache line will
> need invalidate other processors cache line, this will have
> some impact on SMP systems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yalin Wang <yalin.wang@sonymobile.com>
> ---
> include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h | 13 +++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h
> index 697cc2b..e4ef18a 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ static inline void __set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> unsigned long mask = BIT_MASK(nr);
> unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *)addr) + BIT_WORD(nr);
>
> - *p |= mask;
> + if ((*p & mask) == 0)
> + *p |= mask;
Care to fix the double space here while touching the code?
I think the more natural check here is:
if ((~*p & mask) != 0)
*p |= mask;
Might be a matter of taste, but this check is equivalent to
*p != (*p | mask)
which is what you really want to test for. (Your check only has this
property for values of mask that have a single bit set, which is ok here
of course.)
> +
> }
>
> static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> @@ -25,7 +27,8 @@ static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> unsigned long mask = BIT_MASK(nr);
> unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *)addr) + BIT_WORD(nr);
>
> - *p &= ~mask;
> + if ((*p & mask) != 0)
> + *p &= ~mask;
This is already fine.
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -60,7 +63,8 @@ static inline int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *)addr) + BIT_WORD(nr);
> unsigned long old = *p;
>
> - *p = old | mask;
> + if ((old & mask) == 0)
> + *p = old | mask;
Here it would be:
if ((~old & mask) != 0)
> return (old & mask) != 0;
> }
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe Kleine-König)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC] change non-atomic bitops method
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 20:31:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150202193154.GC10842@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35FD53F367049845BC99AC72306C23D1044A02027E0A@CNBJMBX05.corpusers.net>
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 11:55:03AM +0800, Wang, Yalin wrote:
> This patch change non-atomic bitops,
> add a if() condition to test it, before set/clear the bit.
> so that we don't need dirty the cache line, if this bit
> have been set or clear. On SMP system, dirty cache line will
> need invalidate other processors cache line, this will have
> some impact on SMP systems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yalin Wang <yalin.wang@sonymobile.com>
> ---
> include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h | 13 +++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h
> index 697cc2b..e4ef18a 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/non-atomic.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ static inline void __set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> unsigned long mask = BIT_MASK(nr);
> unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *)addr) + BIT_WORD(nr);
>
> - *p |= mask;
> + if ((*p & mask) == 0)
> + *p |= mask;
Care to fix the double space here while touching the code?
I think the more natural check here is:
if ((~*p & mask) != 0)
*p |= mask;
Might be a matter of taste, but this check is equivalent to
*p != (*p | mask)
which is what you really want to test for. (Your check only has this
property for values of mask that have a single bit set, which is ok here
of course.)
> +
> }
>
> static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> @@ -25,7 +27,8 @@ static inline void __clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> unsigned long mask = BIT_MASK(nr);
> unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *)addr) + BIT_WORD(nr);
>
> - *p &= ~mask;
> + if ((*p & mask) != 0)
> + *p &= ~mask;
This is already fine.
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -60,7 +63,8 @@ static inline int __test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr)
> unsigned long *p = ((unsigned long *)addr) + BIT_WORD(nr);
> unsigned long old = *p;
>
> - *p = old | mask;
> + if ((old & mask) == 0)
> + *p = old | mask;
Here it would be:
if ((~old & mask) != 0)
> return (old & mask) != 0;
> }
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-02 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-02 3:55 [RFC] change non-atomic bitops method Wang, Yalin
2015-02-02 3:55 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-02 18:53 ` Laura Abbott
2015-02-02 18:53 ` Laura Abbott
2015-02-02 19:31 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2015-02-02 19:31 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2015-02-03 15:14 ` David Howells
2015-02-03 15:14 ` David Howells
2015-02-03 15:14 ` David Howells
2015-02-03 19:10 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2015-02-03 19:10 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2015-02-02 23:29 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-02 23:29 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-02 23:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-02 23:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-03 1:17 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-02-03 1:17 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-02-03 2:13 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 2:13 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 5:42 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 5:42 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 6:38 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-03 6:38 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-03 7:03 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 7:03 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 8:42 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 8:42 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 10:59 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-03 10:59 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-09 8:18 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-09 8:18 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-09 20:34 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-09 20:34 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-10 7:05 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-10 7:05 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-09 21:42 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-09 21:42 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-09 21:42 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-03 8:40 ` David Miller
2015-02-03 8:40 ` David Miller
2015-02-03 8:48 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-03 8:48 ` Andrew Morton
2015-02-03 9:34 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-03 9:34 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-03 9:34 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-03 9:41 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 9:41 ` Wang, Yalin
2015-02-03 10:39 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-02-03 10:39 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
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=20150202193154.GC10842@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=Yalin.Wang@sonymobile.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.