From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Zachary Amsden <zamsden@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 rwsem optimization extreme
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:29:34 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B7C6DCE.3080609@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1002171403160.4141@localhost.localdomain>
On 02/17/2010 02:10 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Zachary Amsden wrote:
>>
>> The x86 instruction set provides the ability to add an additional
>> bit into addition or subtraction by using the carry flag.
>> It also provides instructions to directly set or clear the
>> carry flag. By forcibly setting the carry flag, we can then
>> represent one particular 64-bit constant, namely
>>
>> 0xffffffff + 1 = 0x100000000
>>
>> using only 32-bit values. In particular we can optimize the rwsem
>> write lock release by noting it is of exactly this form.
>
> Don't do this.
>
> Just shift the constants down by two, and suddenly you don't need any
> clever tricks, because all the constants fit in 32 bits anyway,
> regardless of sign issues.
>
Why bother at all? I thought it mattered when I saw __downgrade_write()
as an inline, but in fact it is only ever used inside the
downgrade_write() out-of-line function, so we're talking about saving
*five bytes* across the whole kernel in the best case. I vote for
leaving it the way it is, and get the very slight extra readability.
There is no point in moving bits around, either.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-17 22:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-17 21:58 [PATCH] x86 rwsem optimization extreme Zachary Amsden
2010-02-17 22:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-17 22:29 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-02-17 23:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 1:03 ` Zachary Amsden
2010-02-18 1:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-18 1:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 4:25 ` Zachary Amsden
2010-02-18 8:12 ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-18 8:24 ` Zachary Amsden
2010-02-18 9:29 ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-18 10:55 ` 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=4B7C6DCE.3080609@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zamsden@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