public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Joel Schopp <jschopp@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: questions on calc_delta_mine() in sched.c
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 14:14:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1209730442.6508.3.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <481A2BF6.2070406@austin.ibm.com>

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 15:45 -0500, Joel Schopp wrote:
> Ingo,
> 
> I have a few questions regarding  this code in kernel/sched.c
> 
> static unsigned long
> calc_delta_mine(unsigned long delta_exec, unsigned long weight,
>          struct load_weight *lw)
> {
>      u64 tmp;
> 
>      if (unlikely(!lw->inv_weight))
>          lw->inv_weight = (WMULT_CONST-lw->weight/2) / (lw->weight+1);
> 
> 
> Q1) This code is hit often in scenarios I run, is this really unlikely for 
> others?

I think it became a lot more likely recently, perhaps removing that
unlikely is not such a bad idea.

> Q2) The rest of the code in sched.c seems to make inv_weight == 
> WMULT_CONST/weight and I was wondering if you could explain why this 
> instance is different.

because the rest of the code is wrong, there are only 2 other sites, and
I have a patch that removes those div64_64() with =0;

The idea is to use rounding division: (x + y/2) / y
but we can't because 'x' is touching the limits of our modulo space,
hence we do: (x - y/2) / y
which comes in 1 short, that fixup has been lost along the way.

> Q3) That division is pretty expensive, could we sacrifice some accuracy and 
> do a precompute table?  Do you have another idea how we could get rid of 
> the divide?

Is a full memory miss not more expensive on most modern machines?

And, no sadly I have no ideas on how to get rid of it ;-/


  reply	other threads:[~2008-05-02 12:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-01 20:45 questions on calc_delta_mine() in sched.c Joel Schopp
2008-05-02 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2008-05-02 12:30   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-02 13:10     ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-02 18:46       ` Joel Schopp
2008-05-02 18:55         ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-02 20:30   ` Joel Schopp

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=1209730442.6508.3.camel@lappy \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=jschopp@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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