From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Deepak R Varma <drv@mailo.com>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>, Michael Reed <mdr@sgi.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Saurabh Singh Sengar <ssengar@microsoft.com>,
Praveen Kumar <kumarpraveen@linux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: qla1280: Replace arithmetic addition by bitwise OR
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 17:15:58 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2302121715090.9268@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+kE0oWExkE6sLnH@ubun2204.myguest.virtualbox.org>
On Sun, 12 Feb 2023, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 04:11:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 12 Feb 2023, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 03:25:03PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > On 2/7/23 03:54, Deepak R Varma wrote:
> > > > > When adding two bit-field mask values, an OR operation offers higher
> > > > > performance over an arithmetic operation. So, convert such addition to
> > > > > an OR based expression.
> > > >
> > > > Where is the evidence that supports this claim? On the following page I read
> > > > that there is no performance difference when using a modern CPU: https://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/75811/why-is-addition-as-fast-as-bit-wise-operations-in-modern-processors
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hello Bart,
> > > You are correct. Modern CPU designs have improved addition and the performance
> > > is at par with the bitwise operation. The document I had read earlier mentioned
> > > a performance improvement for old CPUs and microprocessors, which today is not
> > > the case. Thank you for sharing the link.
> > >
> > > > > Issue identified using orplus.cocci semantic patch script.
> > > >
> > > > Where is that script located? Can it be deleted such that submission of
> > > > patches similar to this patch stops?
> > >
> > > I have added Julia to this email to understand how to best use this semantic
> > > patch. I already discussed with her on improving the Semantic patch such that it
> > > doesn't suggest making change when constants are involved.
> >
> > FWIW, the semantic patch was never motivated by efficiency, but rather
> > with the goal of making the code more understandable.
>
> I think my interpretation of the patch log for [1] was not accurate. The line
> "Running time is divided by 3 ..." made me believe OR'ing would replace "F+A+R"
> instructions by a single operation. My bad.
Ah, interesting. I have no idea any more the running time of what.
julia
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/alpine.DEB.2.20.1711130649370.2483@hadrien/
>
> >
> > julia
>
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-12 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-07 11:54 [PATCH] scsi: qla1280: Replace arithmetic addition by bitwise OR Deepak R Varma
2023-02-11 23:25 ` Bart Van Assche
2023-02-12 15:08 ` Deepak R Varma
2023-02-12 15:11 ` Julia Lawall
2023-02-12 15:25 ` Deepak R Varma
2023-02-12 16:15 ` Julia Lawall [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=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2302121715090.9268@hadrien \
--to=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=drv@mailo.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kumarpraveen@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=mdr@sgi.com \
--cc=ssengar@microsoft.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