From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3]fs/inode: iunique() Optimize Performance Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:17:28 -0700 Message-ID: <20091125141727.GI9482@parisc-linux.org> References: <200911252212166092236@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel , viro , akpm , jack , npiggin , linux-fsdevel , strongzgy , xgr178 , Liu Hui To: Liuweni Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200911252212166092236@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:12:19PM +0800, Liuweni wrote: > @@ -605,8 +605,8 @@ static unsigned long hash(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long hashval) > { > unsigned long tmp; > > - tmp = (hashval * (unsigned long)sb) ^ (GOLDEN_RATIO_PRIME + hashval) / > - L1_CACHE_BYTES; > + tmp = (hashval * (unsigned long)sb) ^ (GOLDEN_RATIO_PRIME + hashval) >> > + L1_CACHE_SHIFT; > tmp = tmp ^ ((tmp ^ GOLDEN_RATIO_PRIME) >> I_HASHBITS); > return tmp & I_HASHMASK; > } Have you compared the compiler output before/after your change? I'd be amazed if GCC isn't able to optimise division-by-a-constant-power-of-two into shift-by-constant. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."