From: Maksym Planeta <mcsim.planeta@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
namhyung@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86: page: get_order() optimization
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 22:33:42 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1301340822.6302.90.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110328050844.GC26322@elte.hu>
On Mon, 28/03/2011 at 07:08 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Have you looked at the disassembly, why does the size increase? I'd expect such
> a straight assembly optimization to result in smaller code: in the non-constant
> case it should be the same size as before, in the constant case it should be
> smaller, because BSR should be smaller than an open-coded search loop, right?
Here is disassembly of patched get_order() with "inline" from
"kernel/kexec.c":
a6c: 48 8b 5d c8 mov -0x38(%rbp),%rbx
a70: e8 0b fd ff ff callq 780 <get_order.clone.7>
0000000000000780 <get_order.clone.7>:
780: 55 push %rbp
781: b8 01 00 00 00 mov $0x1,%eax
786: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
789: c9 leaveq
78a: c3 retq
My version of gcc is gcc (Debian 4.5.2-4) 4.5.2, probably I should
upgrade my gcc version for better inline expansions.
--
Thanks,
Maksym Planeta
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-28 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-27 8:45 [PATCH v2] x86: page: get_order() optimization Maksym Planeta
2011-03-27 11:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-27 16:22 ` Peter Hüwe
2011-03-27 17:15 ` Maksym Planeta
2011-03-28 5:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-28 19:33 ` Maksym Planeta [this message]
2011-03-28 19:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-04-01 14:08 ` Maksym Planeta
2011-03-28 19:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-03-29 7:27 ` Ingo Molnar
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=1301340822.6302.90.camel@debian \
--to=mcsim.planeta@gmail.com \
--cc=JBeulich@novell.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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