From: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] bitops: compile time optimization for hweight_long(CONSTANT)
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 12:24:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100214112447.GA8353@liondog.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1266142343.5273.419.camel@laptop>
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 11:12:23AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 18:24 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:59:45AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > Let me prep another version when I get back on Wed. (currently
> > > travelling) with all the stuff we discussed to see how it would turn.
> >
> > Ok, here's another version ontop of PeterZ's patch at
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/4/119. I need to handle 32- and 64-bit
> > differently wrt to popcnt opcode so on 32-bit I do "popcnt %eax, %eax"
> > while on 64-bit I do "popcnt %rdi, %rdi".
>
> Right, so I don't like how you need to touch !x86 for this, and I think
> that is easily avoidable by not making x86 include
> asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h.
>
> If you then add __sw_hweightN() -> __arch_hweightN() wrappers in
> arch_hweight.h, then you can leave const_hweight.h use __arch_hweightN()
> and simply provide __arch_hweightN() from x86/include/asm/bitops.h
Hmm, all these different names start to get a little confusing. Can we first
agree on the naming please, here's my proposal:
__const_hweightN - for at compile time known constants as arguments
__arch_hweightN - arch possibly has an optimized hweight version
__sw_hweightN - fall back when nothing else is there, aka the functions in
lib/hweight.c
Now, in the x86 case, when the compiler can't know that the argument is
a constant, we call the __arch_hweightN versions. The alternative does
call the __sw_hweightN version in case the CPU doesn't support popcnt.
In this case, we need to build __sw_hweightN with -fcall-saved* for gcc
to be able to take care of the regs clobbered ny __sw_hweightN.
So, if I understand you correctly, your suggestion might work, we
simply need to rename the lib/hweight.c versions to __sw_hweightN
and have <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h> have __arch_hweightN ->
__sw_hweightN wrappers in the default case, all arches which have an
optimized version will provide it in their respective bitops header...
Hows that?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-14 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 81+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-30 9:45 [PATCH 0/5] [RESEND] FMODE_NONOTIFY and FMODE_NEG_OFFSET bits Wu Fengguang
2010-01-30 9:45 ` [PATCH 1/5] fanotify: fix FMODE_NONOTIFY bit number Wu Fengguang
2010-02-01 20:44 ` Andrew Morton
2010-01-30 9:45 ` [PATCH 2/5] bitops: compile time optimization for hweight_long(CONSTANT) Wu Fengguang
2010-02-01 20:48 ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-03 13:39 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-02-03 15:08 ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-03 15:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-03 15:42 ` Andrew Morton
2010-02-03 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-03 17:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-03 18:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-03 18:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-03 19:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-04 15:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-04 15:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-04 15:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-04 16:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-05 12:11 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-05 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-05 21:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-06 9:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-07 1:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-08 9:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-08 9:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-08 9:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-11 17:24 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-11 17:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-12 17:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-12 17:28 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-12 17:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-12 19:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-17 13:57 ` Michal Marek
2010-02-17 17:20 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-17 17:31 ` Michal Marek
2010-02-17 17:34 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-17 17:39 ` Michal Marek
2010-02-18 6:19 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-19 14:22 ` [PATCH] x86: Add optimized popcnt variants Borislav Petkov
2010-02-19 16:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-19 16:45 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-19 16:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-22 14:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-22 17:21 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-22 18:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-22 19:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-23 6:37 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-23 15:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-23 17:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-23 17:54 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-23 18:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-23 19:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-26 5:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-26 7:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-26 17:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-27 8:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-27 20:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-03-09 15:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-03-09 15:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-09 16:23 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-03-09 16:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-09 17:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-03-09 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-18 11:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-03-18 11:19 ` [PATCH 1/2] bitops: Optimize hweight() by making use of compile-time evaluation Borislav Petkov
2010-03-18 11:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: Add optimized popcnt variants Borislav Petkov
2010-02-18 10:51 ` [PATCH 2/5] bitops: compile time optimization for hweight_long(CONSTANT) Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 11:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-14 10:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-14 11:24 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2010-02-14 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-14 14:19 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-14 18:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-14 20:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2010-02-14 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-04 15:16 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-04 15:39 ` Brian Gerst
2010-02-03 17:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-30 9:45 ` [PATCH 3/5] vfs: O_* bit numbers uniqueness check Wu Fengguang
2010-01-30 9:45 ` [PATCH 4/5] vfs: introduce FMODE_NEG_OFFSET for allowing negative f_pos Wu Fengguang
2010-01-30 9:45 ` [PATCH 5/5] devmem: dont allow seek to last page Wu Fengguang
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=20100214112447.GA8353@liondog.tnic \
--to=petkovbb@googlemail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@amd64.org \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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).