From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
adobriyan@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reduce the number of expensive division instructions done by _parse_integer()
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:46:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7095.1328809567@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyw1n=Bz3vi73RD5R13HyWLaVyPZc_z5rR7nGPzvs-BOw@mail.gmail.com>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Looking at the code generated, the "val >> 60" thing actually does
> generate a shift, and at least on x86-64, the attached patch generates
> better code.
On fixed-size instruction arches, the runtime shift is probably the better
option, as simply loading 64-bit large constant would take likely take at
least four instructions - and might involve a shift anyway. On the other
hand, it seems the compiler can optimise your suggestion fairly well. In both
cases, the 64-bit arithmetic can be reduced to 32-bit arithmetic on the MSW
only on 32-bit arches.
On x86_64 we have:
400649: 48 89 d8 mov %rbx,%rax
40064c: 48 c1 e8 3c shr $0x3c,%rax
400650: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax
400653: 75 52 jne 4006a7 <_parse_integer+0xa7>
And on i386 we have:
8048532: 8b 54 24 14 mov 0x14(%esp),%edx
...
8048538: 89 c7 mov %eax,%edi
804853a: c1 ea 1c shr $0x1c,%edx
804853d: 85 d2 test %edx,%edx
804853f: 75 79 jne 80485ba <_parse_integer+0xda>
With your code, we have on x86_64:
40062d: 49 bf 00 00 00 00 00 movabs $0xf000000000000000,%r15
400634: 00 00 f0
...
400659: 4c 85 fb test %r15,%rbx
40065c: 75 59 jne 4006b7 <_parse_integer+0xb7>
And on i386:
804853c: 89 c7 mov %eax,%edi
804853e: f7 44 24 1c 00 00 00 testl $0xf0000000,0x1c(%esp)
8048545: f0
8048546: 75 79 jne 80485c1 <_parse_integer+0xe1>
But it will work too. And I like the pointer indirection removal as well.
I'm not sure there's a lot to choose between them, though I prefer mine as I
think it produces slightly smaller code.
Want me to wrap these changes up with my patch description?
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-09 17:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-09 15:48 [PATCH] Reduce the number of expensive division instructions done by _parse_integer() David Howells
2012-02-09 16:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-02-09 16:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-02-09 16:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-02-09 17:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-02-09 17:46 ` David Howells [this message]
2012-02-09 17:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-02-09 18:07 ` David Howells
2012-02-09 18:08 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-02-09 18:50 ` David Howells
2012-02-09 19:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-02-09 19:23 ` David Howells
2012-02-10 13:50 ` Alexey Dobriyan
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=7095.1328809567@redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.