From: Guan-Chun Wu <409411716@gms.tku.edu.tw>
To: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, visitorckw@gmail.com,
david.laight.linux@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ext4: improve str2hashbuf by processing 4-byte chunks and removing function pointers
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:28:07 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <adiYd7APmgkR3dIi@wu-Pro-E500-G6-WS720T> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260409141050.GA59468@macsyma-wired.lan>
On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 10:10:50AM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 12:39:29PM +0800, Guan-Chun Wu wrote:
> > The original byte-by-byte implementation with modulo checks is less
> > efficient. Refactor str2hashbuf_unsigned() and str2hashbuf_signed()
> > to process input in explicit 4-byte chunks instead of using a
> > modulus-based loop to emit words byte by byte.
> >
> > Additionally, the use of function pointers for selecting the appropriate
> > str2hashbuf implementation has been removed. Instead, the functions are
> > directly invoked based on the hash type, eliminating the overhead of
> > dynamic function calls.
> >
> > Performance test (x86_64, Intel Core i7-10700 @ 2.90GHz, average over 10000
> > runs, using kernel module for testing):
> >
> > len | orig_s | new_s | orig_u | new_u
> > ----+--------+-------+--------+-------
> > 1 | 70 | 71 | 63 | 63
> > 8 | 68 | 64 | 64 | 62
> > 32 | 75 | 70 | 75 | 63
> > 64 | 96 | 71 | 100 | 68
> > 255 | 192 | 108 | 187 | 84
> >
> > This change improves performance, especially for larger input sizes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guan-Chun Wu <409411716@gms.tku.edu.tw>
>
> Apologies for the delay in looking at this. It fell through the
> cracks on my end.
>
> Because of how I'm a bit late with reviewing patches before the merge
> window, I'm going to be very conservative in which patches I'm going
> to land. So this is going to be deferred until the next cycle, but I
> wanted to let you know that I haven't forgotten about it.
>
> If this was a comprehensive set of Kunit tests for fs/ext4/hash.c, I
> might have taken it. And that's something that I would look at adding
> for the next cycle, but if you'd be interested in creating the kunit
> tests for hash.c, that would be great.
>
> - Ted
Thanks for the update.
I'd be happy to add Kunit tests for fs/ext4/hash.c. I'll work on them and
send a v3 patchset with the tests and the optimization in the next cycle.
Best regards,
Guan-Chun
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-10 6:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-22 4:39 [PATCH v2] ext4: improve str2hashbuf by processing 4-byte chunks and removing function pointers Guan-Chun Wu
2026-04-09 14:10 ` Theodore Tso
2026-04-10 6:28 ` Guan-Chun Wu [this message]
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=adiYd7APmgkR3dIi@wu-Pro-E500-G6-WS720T \
--to=409411716@gms.tku.edu.tw \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=visitorckw@gmail.com \
/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