Re: [PATCH v3] of: cache phandle nodes to reduce cost of of_find_node_by_phandle()

[Chintan Pandya <cpandya-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>]

On 2/15/2018 6:22 AM, frowand.list-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand-7U/KSKJipcs@public.gmane.org>
> 
> Create a cache of the nodes that contain a phandle property.  Use this
> cache to find the node for a given phandle value instead of scanning
> the devicetree to find the node.  If the phandle value is not found
> in the cache, of_find_node_by_phandle() will fall back to the tree
> scan algorithm.
> 
> The cache is initialized in of_core_init().
> 
> The cache is freed via a late_initcall_sync() if modules are not
> enabled.
> 
> If the devicetree is created by the dtc compiler, with all phandle
> property values auto generated, then the size required by the cache
> could be 4 * (1 + number of phandles) bytes.  This results in an O(1)
> node lookup cost for a given phandle value.  Due to a concern that the
> phandle property values might not be consistent with what is generated
> by the dtc compiler, a mask has been added to the cache lookup algorithm.
> To maintain the O(1) node lookup cost, the size of the cache has been
> increased by rounding the number of entries up to the next power of
> two.
> 
> The overhead of finding the devicetree node containing a given phandle
> value has been noted by several people in the recent past, in some cases
> with a patch to add a hashed index of devicetree nodes, based on the
> phandle value of the node.  One concern with this approach is the extra
> space added to each node.  This patch takes advantage of the phandle
> property values auto generated by the dtc compiler, which begin with
> one and monotonically increase by one, resulting in a range of 1..n
> for n phandle values.  This implementation should also provide a good
> reduction of overhead for any range of phandle values that are mostly
> in a monotonic range.
> 
> Performance measurements by Chintan Pandya <cpandya-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
> of several implementations of patches that are similar to this one
> suggest an expected reduction of boot time by ~400ms for his test
> system.  If the cache size was decreased to 64 entries, the boot
> time was reduced by ~340 ms.  The measurements were on a 4.9.73 kernel
> for arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sda670-mtp.dts, contains 2371 nodes and
> 814 phandle values.
> 
> Reported-by: Chintan Pandya <cpandya-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>
> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand-7U/KSKJipcs@public.gmane.org>
> ---
> 
> A follow on patch will add an early boot allocation of the cache.
> 
> Changes since v2:
>    - add mask to calculation of phandle cache entry
>    - which results in better overhead reduction for devicetrees with
>      phandle properties not allocated in the monotonically increasing
>      range of 1..n
>    - due to mask, number of entries in cache potentially increased to
>      next power of two
>    - minor fixes as suggested by reviewers
>    - no longer using live_tree_max_phandle() so do not move it from
>      drivers/of/resolver.c to drivers/of/base.c
> 
> Changes since v1:
>    - change short description from
>      of: cache phandle nodes to reduce cost of of_find_node_by_phandle()
>    - rebase on v4.16-rc1
>    - reorder new functions in base.c to avoid forward declaration
>    - add locking around kfree(phandle_cache) for memory ordering
>    - add explicit check for non-null of phandle_cache in
>      of_find_node_by_phandle().  There is already a check for !handle,
>      which prevents accessing a null phandle_cache, but that dependency
>      is not obvious, so this check makes it more apparent.
>    - do not free phandle_cache if modules are enabled, so that
>      cached phandles will be available when modules are loaded
> 
>   drivers/of/base.c       | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>   drivers/of/of_private.h |  3 ++
>   drivers/of/resolver.c   |  3 --
>   3 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
> index ad28de96e13f..ab545dfa9173 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
> @@ -91,10 +91,69 @@ int __weak of_node_to_nid(struct device_node *np)
>   }
>   #endif
>   
> +static struct device_node **phandle_cache;
> +static u32 phandle_cache_mask;
> +
> +/*
> + * Assumptions behind phandle_cache implementation:
> + *   - phandle property values are in a contiguous range of 1..n
> + *
> + * If the assumptions do not hold, then
> + *   - the phandle lookup overhead reduction provided by the cache
> + *     will likely be less
> + */
> +static void of_populate_phandle_cache(void)
> +{
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	u32 cache_entries;
> +	struct device_node *np;
> +	u32 phandles = 0;
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
> +
> +	kfree(phandle_cache);

I couldn't understood this. Everything else looks good to me.

> +	phandle_cache = NULL;
> +
> +	for_each_of_allnodes(np)
> +		if (np->phandle && np->phandle != OF_PHANDLE_ILLEGAL)
> +			phandles++;
> +
> +	cache_entries = roundup_pow_of_two(phandles);
> +	phandle_cache_mask = cache_entries - 1;
> +
> +	phandle_cache = kcalloc(cache_entries, sizeof(*phandle_cache),
> +				GFP_ATOMIC);
> +
> +	for_each_of_allnodes(np)
> +		if (np->phandle && np->phandle != OF_PHANDLE_ILLEGAL)
> +			phandle_cache[np->phandle & phandle_cache_mask] = np;
> +
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> +#ifndef CONFIG_MODULES
> +static int __init of_free_phandle_cache(void)
> +{
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
> +
> +	kfree(phandle_cache);
> +	phandle_cache = NULL;
> +
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +late_initcall_sync(of_free_phandle_cache);
> +#endif
> +
>   void __init of_core_init(void)
>   {
>   	struct device_node *np;
>   
> +	of_populate_phandle_cache();
> +
>   	/* Create the kset, and register existing nodes */
>   	mutex_lock(&of_mutex);
>   	of_kset = kset_create_and_add("devicetree", NULL, firmware_kobj);
> @@ -1021,16 +1080,32 @@ int of_modalias_node(struct device_node *node, char *modalias, int len)
>    */
>   struct device_node *of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle handle)
>   {
> -	struct device_node *np;
> +	struct device_node *np = NULL;
>   	unsigned long flags;
> +	phandle masked_handle;
>   
>   	if (!handle)
>   		return NULL;
>   
>   	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
> -	for_each_of_allnodes(np)
> -		if (np->phandle == handle)
> -			break;
> +
> +	masked_handle = handle & phandle_cache_mask;
> +
> +	if (phandle_cache) {
> +		if (phandle_cache[masked_handle] &&
> +		    handle == phandle_cache[masked_handle]->phandle)
> +			np = phandle_cache[masked_handle];
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!np) {
> +		for_each_of_allnodes(np)
> +			if (np->phandle == handle) {
> +				if (phandle_cache)
> +					phandle_cache[masked_handle] = np;
> +				break;
> +			}
> +	}
> +
>   	of_node_get(np);
>   	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devtree_lock, flags);
>   	return np;
> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_private.h b/drivers/of/of_private.h
> index 0c609e7d0334..fa70650136b4 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/of_private.h
> +++ b/drivers/of/of_private.h
> @@ -131,6 +131,9 @@ extern void __of_update_property_sysfs(struct device_node *np,
>   extern void __of_sysfs_remove_bin_file(struct device_node *np,
>   				       struct property *prop);
>   
> +/* illegal phandle value (set when unresolved) */
> +#define OF_PHANDLE_ILLEGAL	0xdeadbeef
> +
>   /* iterators for transactions, used for overlays */
>   /* forward iterator */
>   #define for_each_transaction_entry(_oft, _te) \
> diff --git a/drivers/of/resolver.c b/drivers/of/resolver.c
> index 740d19bde601..b2ca8185c8c6 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/resolver.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/resolver.c
> @@ -19,9 +19,6 @@
>   
>   #include "of_private.h"
>   
> -/* illegal phandle value (set when unresolved) */
> -#define OF_PHANDLE_ILLEGAL	0xdeadbeef
> -
>   static phandle live_tree_max_phandle(void)
>   {
>   	struct device_node *node;
> 

Chintan
-- 
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center,
Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation
Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html