public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
To: I Hsin Cheng <richard120310@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev, jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fat: Refactor fat_tolower with branchless implementation
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 12:53:47 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tt7rkn90.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250318034309.920866-1-richard120310@gmail.com>

I Hsin Cheng <richard120310@gmail.com> writes:

> Elimate the need of if-else branch within fat_tolower, replace it with a
> branchless bitwise operation. This can reduce the number of branch ~130
> regarding to the test script[1].
>
> Test size can also be reduced:
> $ ./scripts/bloat-o-meter vmlinux_old vmlinux_new
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/1 up/down: 0/-68 (-68)
> Function                                     old     new   delta
> fat_parse_short                             1901    1833     -68
> Total: Before=22471023, After=22470955, chg -0.00%
>
> Signed-off-by: I Hsin Cheng <richard120310@gmail.com>
> ---
> [1]:
> static inline unsigned char old_tolower(unsigned char c)
> {
>     return ((c >= 'A') && (c <= 'Z')) ? c+32 : c;
> }
>
> static inline unsigned char new_tolower(unsigned char c)
> {
>     return c | 0x20;
> }

Looks like doesn't work correctly. For example, new one changes TAB to ')'.

Thanks.

> int main(void) {
>     for (unsigned char i = 0; i < 26; i++) {
>         if (old_tolower('a' + i) != old_tolower('A' + i))
>             return 1;
>     }
>
>     return 0;
> }
>
> Utilize perf to profile the difference when using old_tolower() and
> new_tolower().
>
> $ perf stat -e branches,branch-misses --repeat 100 ./old
>
>  Performance counter stats for './old':
>
>             2,6302      branches:u
>               2334      branch-misses:u
>
>        0.000754710 seconds time elapsed
>
>        0.000000000 seconds user
>        0.000804000 seconds sys
>
> $ perf stat -e branches,branch-misses --repeat 100 ./new
>
>  Performance counter stats for './main':
>
>             2,6172      branches:u
>               2338      branch-misses:u
>
>        0.000782670 seconds time elapsed
>
>        0.000853000 seconds user
>        0.000000000 seconds sys
>
> Best regards,
> I Hsin Cheng
> ---
>  fs/fat/dir.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fat/dir.c b/fs/fat/dir.c
> index acbec5bdd521..77d212b4d4db 100644
> --- a/fs/fat/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/fat/dir.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
>  
>  static inline unsigned char fat_tolower(unsigned char c)
>  {
> -	return ((c >= 'A') && (c <= 'Z')) ? c+32 : c;
> +	return c | 0x20;
>  }
>  
>  static inline loff_t fat_make_i_pos(struct super_block *sb,

-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>

  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-18  4:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-18  3:43 [PATCH] fat: Refactor fat_tolower with branchless implementation I Hsin Cheng
2025-03-18  3:53 ` OGAWA Hirofumi [this message]
2025-03-18  4:03 ` Al Viro
2025-03-19  2:49   ` I Hsin Cheng

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=87tt7rkn90.fsf@mail.parknet.co.jp \
    --to=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
    --cc=jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw \
    --cc=linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=richard120310@gmail.com \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    /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