linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: "Lukáš Czerner" <lczerner@redhat.com>
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] libext2fs: optimize rb_test_bit
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 14:17:53 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121008181753.GA20682@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1210081016160.25096@localhost>

On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 10:25:19AM +0200, Lukáš Czerner wrote:
> > the patch and the idea behind it look fine, especially when we're
> > walking the bitmap sequentially not modifying it simultaneously, but
> > I have one question/suggestion below.
> 
> Also for this kind of usage it might actually make sense to have
> something like:
> 
> get_next_zero_bit
> get_next_set_bit
> 
> which would be much more effective than testing single bits, but it
> would require actually using this in e2fsprogs tools.

Yes, I thought about that, and in fact we already have find_first_zero
(which takes a starting offset, so works for both find_first and
find_next).  When we introduced this, though, we accidentally
introduced a bug at first.

At some point I agree it would be good to implement find_first_set(),
and writing new unit tests, and then modify e2freefrag, e2fsck, and
dumpe2fs to use it.  But in the applications is actually pretty
tricky, and I didn't have the time I figured would be necessary to
really do the changes right, and validate/test them properly.

So yes, I agree this would be much more effective, and ultimately
would result in further speedups in e2fsck and e2freefrag in
particular.  It would also allow us to take out the test_bit
optimizations which do have a slight cost for random access reads ---
and this is measurable when looking at the results of the CPU time for
e2fsck pass 4 in particular.  It's just that the performance hit for
the random access test_bit case is very tiny compared with the huge
wins in the sequential scan case.

> > what about using the next_ext once we're holding it to check the bit
> > ? On sequential walk this shout make sense to do so since we
> > actually should hit this if we're not in rcursor nor between rcursor
> > and next_ext.

Yes, I implemented that in the 2/3 commit in the follow-on patch
series.

Cheers!

						 - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2012-10-08 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-05  3:44 [PATCH 1/2] e2freefrag: use 64-bit rbtree bitmaps Theodore Ts'o
2012-10-05  3:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] libext2fs: optimize rb_test_bit Theodore Ts'o
2012-10-06  2:04   ` [PATCH 1/3] libext2fs: remove pointless indirection in rbtree bitmaps Theodore Ts'o
2012-10-06  2:04     ` [PATCH 2/3] libext2fs: further optimize rb_test_bit Theodore Ts'o
2012-10-06  2:04     ` [PATCH 3/3] Fix makefiles to compile e2freefrag with profiling Theodore Ts'o
2012-10-06 15:54       ` Eric Sandeen
2012-10-06 15:52     ` [PATCH 1/3] libext2fs: remove pointless indirection in rbtree bitmaps Eric Sandeen
2012-10-08  8:08   ` [PATCH 2/2] libext2fs: optimize rb_test_bit Lukáš Czerner
2012-10-08  8:25     ` Lukáš Czerner
2012-10-08 18:17       ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2012-10-09  7:18         ` Lukáš Czerner
2012-10-09 19:55           ` Theodore Ts'o

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=20121008181753.GA20682@thunk.org \
    --to=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).