From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ngdg6-0002q0-0m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:34:22 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47832 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ngdg3-0002pI-I0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:34:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim
	4.60) (envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1Ngdg2-0005rI-Fy
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:34:19 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5216)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1Ngdg2-0005rA-2y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:34:18 -0500
Message-ID: <4B77EDC2.7000401@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:34:10 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4B728FF9.6010707@lab.ntt.co.jp> <4B72B28E.6010801@redhat.com>
	<4B72D706.3070602@codemonkey.ws> <4B74B70A.4030805@lab.ntt.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <4B74B70A.4030805@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2] qemu-kvm: Speed up of the
	dirty-bitmap-traveling
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: OHMURA Kei <ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, mtosatti@redhat.com, Yoshiaki Tamura <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, drepper@redhat.com

On 02/12/2010 04:03 AM, OHMURA Kei wrote:
> On 02/11/2010 Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
>   
>> Oh, I see what's happening here. Yes, I think a leul_to_cpu() makes more
>> sense.
>>     
> Maybe I'm missing something here.
> I couldn't find leul_to_cpu(), so have defined it in bswap.h.
> Correct?
>
> --- a/bswap.h
> +++ b/bswap.h
> @@ -205,8 +205,10 @@ static inline void cpu_to_be32wu(uint32_t *p, uint32_t v)
>  
>  #ifdef HOST_WORDS_BIGENDIAN
>  #define cpu_to_32wu cpu_to_be32wu
> +#define leul_to_cpu(v) le ## HOST_LONG_BITS ## _to_cpu(v)
>  #else
>  #define cpu_to_32wu cpu_to_le32wu
> +#define leul_to_cpu(v) (v)
>  #endif
>
>
>
> On 02/10/2010 Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> wrote:
>   
>> If you're optimizing this code you might want to do it all.  The
>> compiler might not see through the bswap call and create unnecessary
>> data dependencies.  Especially problematic if the bitmap is really
>> sparse.  Also, the outer test is != while the inner test is >.  Be
>> consistent.  I suggest to replace the inner loop with
>>
>>      do {
>>        ...
>>      } while (c != 0);
>>
>> Depending on how sparse the bitmap is populated this might reduce the
>> number of data dependencies quite a bit.
>>     
> Combining all comments, the code would be like this.
>      
>  if (bitmap_ul[i] != 0) {
>      c = leul_to_cpu(bitmap_ul[i]);
>      do {
>          j = ffsl(c) - 1;
>          c &= ~(1ul << j);
>          page_number = i * HOST_LONG_BITS + j;
>          addr1 = page_number * TARGET_PAGE_SIZE;
>          addr = offset + addr1;
>          ram_addr = cpu_get_physical_page_desc(addr);
>          cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty(ram_addr);
>      } while (c != 0);
>  }
>   

Except you don't need bitmap_ul any more - you can change the type of
the bitmap variable, since all accesses should now be ulongs.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function