public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Amit K. Arora" <aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: minor optimizations in wake_affine and select_task_rq_fair
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:33:26 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080930070326.GA5331@amitarora.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48E0FDC5.1080500@nortel.com>

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:09:41AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Amit K. Arora wrote:
>> sched: Minor optimizations in wake_affine and select_task_rq_fair
>>
>> This patch does following:
>> o Reduces the number of arguments to wake_affine().
>
> At what point is it cheaper to pass items as args rather than recalculating 
> them?  If reducing the number of args is desirable, what about removing the 
> "this_cpu" and "prev_cpu" args and recalculating them in wake_affine()?

Thats a good question. Its kind of arguable and I wasn't sure if
everyone will be happy if I removed more arguments from wake_affine() than
what I did in my patch (because of the recalculations required).

wake_affine() currently has 11 arguments and I thought it may make sense
in reducing it to a sane number. For that I chose arguments which I
thought can be recalculated with minimum overhead (involves single struct
dereference, a simple per cpu variable and/or a simple arithmetic). And
one argument ("rq") which is being removed, isn't used at all in the
function!

Regarding the two variables you have mentioned, I didn't remove them as
args since I wasn't sure of "this_cpu" (which is nothing but
smp_processor_id()) as it is arch dependent, and calculating "prev_cpu"
involves two struct dereferences (((struct thread_info *)(task)->stack)->cpu).
And the calculation for other arguments (like, this_sd, load and this_load)
involves good amount of instructions.

If you disagree, what do you suggest we do here ?

Regards,
Amit Arora

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-09-30  7:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-09-29 10:02 [PATCH] sched: minor optimizations in wake_affine and select_task_rq_fair Amit K. Arora
2008-09-29 16:09 ` Chris Friesen
2008-09-30  7:01   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-09-30 11:40     ` Amit K. Arora
2008-09-30  7:03   ` Amit K. Arora [this message]
2008-09-30 11:45 ` [PATCH][resubmit] " Amit K. Arora
2008-09-30 13:26   ` 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=20080930070326.GA5331@amitarora.in.ibm.com \
    --to=aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.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