From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Brassow <jbrassow@redhat.com>,
rhkernel-list@redhat.com
Subject: Re: change '%' to condition
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:39:19 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130912153919.26831641@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1307201112210.2761@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1640 bytes --]
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 19:18:57 -0400 (EDT) Mikulas Patocka
<mpatocka@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think you should revert the patch
> 4c0ca26bd260dddf3b9781758cb5e2df3f74d4a3 that did this change:
>
> for (f = 1; f < geo->far_copies; f++) {
> d += geo->near_copies;
> - if (d >= geo->raid_disks)
> - d -= geo->raid_disks;
> + d %= geo->raid_disks;
> s += geo->stride;
> r10bio->devs[slot].devnum = d;
> r10bio->devs[slot].addr = s;
>
>
> On most processors, the divide and modulo operations are slower than a
> possibly misprediteced branch or conditional move instruction.
>
> So, replacing a condition with modulo doesn't make sense.
>
> A benchmark on AMD K10 shows that mispredicted branch is 8.7 times faster
> than a divide operation:
>
> for (i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {
> q++;
> if (q >= 8)
> q -= 8;
> }
> - 11607us (it compiles to cmov and runs at a rate of 3 ticks per
> iteration)
>
> for (i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {
> q++;
> q %= max;
> }
> - 101241us (26 ticks per iteration)
>
>
> Mikulas
I can't seem to get excited about this sort of micro optimisation.
If someone were to send me a nice patch with a good description and a couple
of acked-by:s from relevant people I would probably apply it. But otherwise
I just wouldn't care.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-12 5:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1373890837-3475-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <1373890837-3475-67-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <alpine.LRH.2.02.1307151445220.23929@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
[not found] ` <wrfjfvvely2a.fsf@redhat.com>
2013-09-11 23:18 ` change '%' to condition Mikulas Patocka
2013-09-11 23:37 ` Mike Snitzer
2013-09-12 5:39 ` NeilBrown [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=20130912153919.26831641@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com \
--cc=jbrassow@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpatocka@redhat.com \
--cc=rhkernel-list@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).