From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
"Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <harry@kernel.org>,
Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: drop flag-conversion "optimisation"
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 12:33:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiw08Iy6BYCPX9am@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260612-gfp-pessimisation-v1-1-936eb04202e7@google.com>
On Fri, Jun 12, 2026 at 02:15:44PM +0000, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> This code uses flag equivalences to try to optimise conversion from
> GFP_ to ALLOC_ but there's no clear reason to believe it makes things
> faster. Even if it gets rid of conditional branches, it just trades them
> for a data dependency.
>
> CPUs are pretty good at conditional branches. But, in my GCC x86 build
> it doesn't look like there are any branches anyway, the compiler found
> some conditional instruction tricks. (Caveat: This was extracted &
> annotated by Gemini AI, I did not actually read the disasm myself)
>
> Old code:
>
> ae50: 8b 04 24 mov (%rsp),%eax # Load gfp_mask
> ...
> ae5d: 41 89 c4 mov %eax,%r12d
> ae64: 41 81 e4 20 08 00 00 and $0x820,%r12d # Mask both flags at once
> ...
> ae6f: 44 89 e1 mov %r12d,%ecx
> ae77: 83 c9 40 or $0x40,%ecx # OR with ALLOC_CPUSET (0x40)
> ae7a: 89 4c 24 60 mov %ecx,0x60(%rsp) # Store to alloc_flags
>
> New code:
>
> For __GFP_HIGH ( 0x20 ):
> It uses the Carry Flag (via sbb ) to conditionally add 0x20 to the base 0x40 ( ALLOC_CPUSET ) flag:
>
> ae63: 83 e0 20 and $0x20,%eax # Test __GFP_HIGH
> ...
> ae6a: 83 f8 01 cmp $0x1,%eax # Set carry flag if 0
> ae6f: 45 19 e4 sbb %r12d,%r12d # %r12d = (gfp & 0x20) ? 0 : -1
> ae80: 41 83 e4 e0 and $0xffffffe0,%r12d # %r12d = (gfp & 0x20) ? 0 : -32
> ae87: 41 83 c4 60 add $0x60,%r12d # %r12d = (gfp & 0x20) ? 0x60 : 0x40
>
> For __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM ( 0x800 ):
> It uses a conditional move ( cmov ) later in the function to set the ALLOC_KSWAPD ( 0x800 ) bit:
>
> ae72: 25 00 08 00 00 and $0x800,%eax # Test __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM
> ae77: 89 44 24 30 mov %eax,0x30(%rsp) # Store result
> ...
> af2c: 80 cf 08 or $0x8,%bh # Set ALLOC_KSWAPD (0x800) in temp reg
> af2f: 45 85 c9 test %r9d,%r9d # Check if __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM was set
> af32: 0f 44 d8 cmove %eax,%ebx # If not, revert to flags without it
>
> Testing with a modified version[0] of lib/free_pages_test.c (adding
> printks with timing)...
>
> [0] https://github.com/bjackman/aethelred/blob/2ccdc84ef087c2a631914f58e106e99e19bd3b98/page-alloc-test/page-alloc-test.c
>
> Old results from a Sapphire Rapids consumer CPU:
>
> [ 67.157118] page_alloc_test: Testing with GFP_KERNEL
> [ 67.157122] page_alloc_test: Starting 1,000,000 allocations...
> [ 70.704446] page_alloc_test: Completed. Time: 3543002 us (Avg: 3543.00 ns per alloc+free loop)
> [ 70.704456] page_alloc_test: Testing with GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_COMP
> [ 70.704460] page_alloc_test: Starting 1,000,000 allocations...
> [ 70.944672] page_alloc_test: Completed. Time: 239980 us (Avg: 239.98 ns per alloc+free loop)
> [ 70.944675] page_alloc_test: Test completed
>
> New results:
>
> [ 70.079015] page_alloc_test: Testing with GFP_KERNEL
> [ 70.079020] page_alloc_test: Starting 1,000,000 allocations...
> [ 73.669396] page_alloc_test: Completed. Time: 3586954 us (Avg: 3586.95 ns per alloc+free loop)
> [ 73.669402] page_alloc_test: Testing with GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_COMP
> [ 73.669405] page_alloc_test: Starting 1,000,000 allocations...
> [ 73.905084] page_alloc_test: Completed. Time: 235496 us (Avg: 235.49 ns per alloc+free loop)
> [ 73.905086] page_alloc_test: Test completed
>
> Seems like a wash.
>
> So, drop the flag value coupling here and let the compiler and CPU do
> their job. Superscalar CPUs are pretty neat after all.
>
> (Used AI for the disasm but the rest is all manual).
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
Nice. With the _nofragment() bits folded:
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-12 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-12 14:15 [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: drop flag-conversion "optimisation" Brendan Jackman
2026-06-12 14:23 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-12 14:24 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-12 14:53 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-12 15:06 ` Zi Yan
2026-06-12 16:04 ` Gregory Price
2026-06-12 16:33 ` Johannes Weiner [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=aiw08Iy6BYCPX9am@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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