All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>, willy@infradead.org
Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mst@redhat.com,
	mhocko@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	mawilcox@microsoft.com
Subject: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v20 3/7 RESEND] xbitmap: add more operations
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:45:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5A3CC62D.6020001@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201712212337.JFC57368.tLFOJFVSFHMOOQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On 12/21/2017 10:37 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> +/**
>>> + * xb_find_set - find the next set bit in a range of bits
>>> + * @xb: the xbitmap to search from
>>> + * @offset: the offset in the range to start searching
>>> + * @size: the size of the range
>>> + *
>>> + * Returns: the found bit or, @size if no set bit is found.
>>> + */
>>> +unsigned long xb_find_set(struct xb *xb, unsigned long size,
>>> +			  unsigned long offset)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct radix_tree_root *root = &xb->xbrt;
>>> +	struct radix_tree_node *node;
>>> +	void __rcu **slot;
>>> +	struct ida_bitmap *bitmap;
>>> +	unsigned long index = offset / IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +	unsigned long index_end = size / IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +	unsigned long bit = offset % IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +	if (unlikely(offset >= size))
>>> +		return size;
>>> +
>>> +	while (index <= index_end) {
>>> +		unsigned long ret;
>>> +		unsigned int nbits = size - index * IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +		bitmap = __radix_tree_lookup(root, index, &node, &slot);
>>> +
>>> +		if (!node && !bitmap)
>>> +			return size;
>>> +
>>> +		if (bitmap) {
>>> +			if (nbits > IDA_BITMAP_BITS)
>>> +				nbits = IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +			ret = find_next_bit(bitmap->bitmap, nbits, bit);
>>> +			if (ret != nbits)
>>> +				return ret + index * IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +		}
>>> +		bit = 0;
>>> +		index++;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	return size;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(xb_find_set);
>> This is going to be slower than the implementation I sent yesterday.  If I
>> call:
>> 	xb_init(xb);
>> 	xb_set_bit(xb, ULONG_MAX);
>> 	xb_find_set(xb, ULONG_MAX, 0);
>>
>> it's going to call __radix_tree_lookup() 16 quadrillion times.
>> My implementation will walk the tree precisely once.
>>
> Yes. Wei's patch still can not work.
> We should start reviewing Matthew's implementation.

It runs without any issue on my machine. I didn't generate an "xbitmap" 
executable (I just found adding xbitmap executable causes a build error 
due to a Makefile error), instead, I tested it within "main" and it 
passed all the tests.

Matthew has implemented a new version, let's start from there.

Best,
Wei


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>, willy@infradead.org
Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mst@redhat.com,
	mhocko@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	mawilcox@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 3/7 RESEND] xbitmap: add more operations
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:45:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5A3CC62D.6020001@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201712212337.JFC57368.tLFOJFVSFHMOOQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On 12/21/2017 10:37 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> +/**
>>> + * xb_find_set - find the next set bit in a range of bits
>>> + * @xb: the xbitmap to search from
>>> + * @offset: the offset in the range to start searching
>>> + * @size: the size of the range
>>> + *
>>> + * Returns: the found bit or, @size if no set bit is found.
>>> + */
>>> +unsigned long xb_find_set(struct xb *xb, unsigned long size,
>>> +			  unsigned long offset)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct radix_tree_root *root = &xb->xbrt;
>>> +	struct radix_tree_node *node;
>>> +	void __rcu **slot;
>>> +	struct ida_bitmap *bitmap;
>>> +	unsigned long index = offset / IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +	unsigned long index_end = size / IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +	unsigned long bit = offset % IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +	if (unlikely(offset >= size))
>>> +		return size;
>>> +
>>> +	while (index <= index_end) {
>>> +		unsigned long ret;
>>> +		unsigned int nbits = size - index * IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +		bitmap = __radix_tree_lookup(root, index, &node, &slot);
>>> +
>>> +		if (!node && !bitmap)
>>> +			return size;
>>> +
>>> +		if (bitmap) {
>>> +			if (nbits > IDA_BITMAP_BITS)
>>> +				nbits = IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +			ret = find_next_bit(bitmap->bitmap, nbits, bit);
>>> +			if (ret != nbits)
>>> +				return ret + index * IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +		}
>>> +		bit = 0;
>>> +		index++;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	return size;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(xb_find_set);
>> This is going to be slower than the implementation I sent yesterday.  If I
>> call:
>> 	xb_init(xb);
>> 	xb_set_bit(xb, ULONG_MAX);
>> 	xb_find_set(xb, ULONG_MAX, 0);
>>
>> it's going to call __radix_tree_lookup() 16 quadrillion times.
>> My implementation will walk the tree precisely once.
>>
> Yes. Wei's patch still can not work.
> We should start reviewing Matthew's implementation.

It runs without any issue on my machine. I didn't generate an "xbitmap" 
executable (I just found adding xbitmap executable causes a build error 
due to a Makefile error), instead, I tested it within "main" and it 
passed all the tests.

Matthew has implemented a new version, let's start from there.

Best,
Wei

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>, willy@infradead.org
Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mst@redhat.com,
	mhocko@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	mawilcox@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 3/7 RESEND] xbitmap: add more operations
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:45:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5A3CC62D.6020001@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201712212337.JFC57368.tLFOJFVSFHMOOQ@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>

On 12/21/2017 10:37 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> +/**
>>> + * xb_find_set - find the next set bit in a range of bits
>>> + * @xb: the xbitmap to search from
>>> + * @offset: the offset in the range to start searching
>>> + * @size: the size of the range
>>> + *
>>> + * Returns: the found bit or, @size if no set bit is found.
>>> + */
>>> +unsigned long xb_find_set(struct xb *xb, unsigned long size,
>>> +			  unsigned long offset)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct radix_tree_root *root = &xb->xbrt;
>>> +	struct radix_tree_node *node;
>>> +	void __rcu **slot;
>>> +	struct ida_bitmap *bitmap;
>>> +	unsigned long index = offset / IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +	unsigned long index_end = size / IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +	unsigned long bit = offset % IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +	if (unlikely(offset >= size))
>>> +		return size;
>>> +
>>> +	while (index <= index_end) {
>>> +		unsigned long ret;
>>> +		unsigned int nbits = size - index * IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +		bitmap = __radix_tree_lookup(root, index, &node, &slot);
>>> +
>>> +		if (!node && !bitmap)
>>> +			return size;
>>> +
>>> +		if (bitmap) {
>>> +			if (nbits > IDA_BITMAP_BITS)
>>> +				nbits = IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +
>>> +			ret = find_next_bit(bitmap->bitmap, nbits, bit);
>>> +			if (ret != nbits)
>>> +				return ret + index * IDA_BITMAP_BITS;
>>> +		}
>>> +		bit = 0;
>>> +		index++;
>>> +	}
>>> +
>>> +	return size;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(xb_find_set);
>> This is going to be slower than the implementation I sent yesterday.  If I
>> call:
>> 	xb_init(xb);
>> 	xb_set_bit(xb, ULONG_MAX);
>> 	xb_find_set(xb, ULONG_MAX, 0);
>>
>> it's going to call __radix_tree_lookup() 16 quadrillion times.
>> My implementation will walk the tree precisely once.
>>
> Yes. Wei's patch still can not work.
> We should start reviewing Matthew's implementation.

It runs without any issue on my machine. I didn't generate an "xbitmap" 
executable (I just found adding xbitmap executable causes a build error 
due to a Makefile error), instead, I tested it within "main" and it 
passed all the tests.

Matthew has implemented a new version, let's start from there.

Best,
Wei

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2017-12-22  8:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-21  2:30 [virtio-dev] [PATCH v20 3/7 RESEND] xbitmap: add more operations Wei Wang
2017-12-21  2:30 ` Wei Wang
2017-12-21  2:30 ` Wei Wang
2017-12-21 14:18 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 14:18   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 14:18   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 14:37   ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-12-21 14:37     ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-12-22  8:45     ` Wei Wang [this message]
2017-12-22  8:45       ` Wei Wang
2017-12-22  8:45       ` Wei Wang
2017-12-22  8:45     ` Wei Wang
2017-12-21 21:03 ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 21:03   ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-22  8:49   ` Wei Wang
2017-12-22  8:49   ` [virtio-dev] " Wei Wang
2017-12-22  8:49     ` Wei Wang
2017-12-22  8:49     ` Wei Wang
2018-01-02 14:09     ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-02 14:09       ` Matthew Wilcox
2018-01-03  8:56       ` Wei Wang
2018-01-03  8:56       ` [virtio-dev] " Wei Wang
2018-01-03  8:56         ` Wei Wang
2018-01-03  8:56         ` Wei Wang
2018-01-02 14:09     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-23  2:59   ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-12-23  2:59     ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-12-23  3:29     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-23  3:29       ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-23 14:33       ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-12-23 14:33         ` Tetsuo Handa
2017-12-23 14:58         ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-23 14:58         ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-23 14:58           ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-24  7:31         ` Wei Wang
2017-12-24  7:31         ` [virtio-dev] " Wei Wang
2017-12-24  7:31           ` Wei Wang
2017-12-24  7:31           ` Wei Wang
2017-12-23  3:29     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-12-21 21:03 ` Matthew Wilcox

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=5A3CC62D.6020001@intel.com \
    --to=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mawilcox@microsoft.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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.