From: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: Micro optimization in pick_next_task() and in check_preempt_curr()
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 17:25:40 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bfaa72ca-8bc6-f93c-30d7-5d62f2600f53@virtuozzo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191219140252.GS2871@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 19.12.2019 17:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 02:12:42PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 03:39:14PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>>> In kernel/sched/Makefile files, describing different sched classes, already
>>> go in the order from the lowest priority class to the highest priority class:
>>>
>>> idle.o fair.o rt.o deadline.o stop_task.o
>>>
>>> The documentation of GNU linker says, that section appears in the order
>>> they are seen during link time (see [1]):
>>>
>>>> Normally, the linker will place files and sections matched by wildcards
>>>> in the order in which they are seen during the link. You can change this
>>>> by using the SORT keyword, which appears before a wildcard pattern
>>>> in parentheses (e.g., SORT(.text*)).
>>>
>>> So, we may expect const variables from idle.o will go before ro variables
>>> from fair.o in RO_DATA section, while ro variables from fair.o will go
>>> before ro variables from rt.o, etc.
>>>
>>> (Also, it looks like the linking order is already used in kernel, e.g.
>>> in drivers/md/Makefile)
>>>
>>> Thus, we may introduce an optimization based on xxx_sched_class addresses
>>> in these two hot scheduler functions: pick_next_task() and check_preempt_curr().
>>>
>>> One more result of the patch is that size of object file becomes a little
>>> less (excluding added BUG_ON(), which goes in __init section):
>>>
>>> $size kernel/sched/core.o
>>> text data bss dec hex filename
>>> before: 66446 18957 676 86079 1503f kernel/sched/core.o
>>> after: 66398 18957 676 86031 1500f kernel/sched/core.o
>>
>> Does LTO preserve this behaviour? I've never quite dared do this exact
>> optimization.
>
> Also, ld.lld seems a popular option.
I asked on their IRC. Oh, it looks like no way is for this.
About the link: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/4/html/Using_ld_the_GNU_Linker/sections.html
(17:19:25) nbjoerg: but it is not guarenteed behavior
(17:19:50) nbjoerg: if for some strange reason you really need to enforce relative orders of global objects, put them in consecutively named sections
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-19 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-19 12:39 [PATCH RFC] sched: Micro optimization in pick_next_task() and in check_preempt_curr() Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 13:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-19 14:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-19 14:25 ` Kirill Tkhai [this message]
2019-12-19 14:31 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 14:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 14:46 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 14:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 15:20 ` [PATCH v2] " Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 15:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 16:08 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 16:22 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 20:16 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 20:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 16:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 14:04 ` [Q] ld: Does LTO reorder ro variables in two files? Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 15:21 ` Jeff Law
2019-12-19 15:30 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 15:45 ` Alexander Monakov
2019-12-19 16:08 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 13:50 ` [PATCH RFC] sched: Micro optimization in pick_next_task() and in check_preempt_curr() Steven Rostedt
2019-12-19 13:53 ` Kirill Tkhai
2019-12-19 13:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-06-25 11:53 ` [tip: sched/core] sched: Force the address order of each sched class descriptor tip-bot2 for Steven Rostedt (VMware)
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=bfaa72ca-8bc6-f93c-30d7-5d62f2600f53@virtuozzo.com \
--to=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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