mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>
To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Kok,
	Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>,
	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@computergmbh.de>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>, roel <12o3l@tiscali.nl>,
	Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>,
	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@computergmbh.de>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>, roel <12o3l@tiscali.nl>
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] CodingStyle updates
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:32:00 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <11910151223447-git-send-email-ezk@cs.sunysb.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11910151223214-git-send-email-ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>

1. Updates chapter 13 (printing kernel messages) to expand on the use of
   pr_debug()/pr_info(), what to avoid, and how to hook your debug code with
   kernel.h.

2. New chapter 19, branch prediction optimizations, discusses the whole
   un/likely issue.

Cc: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>
Cc: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
Cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@computergmbh.de>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: roel <12o3l@tiscali.nl>

Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu>
---
 Documentation/CodingStyle |   88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/CodingStyle b/Documentation/CodingStyle
index 7f1730f..00b29e4 100644
--- a/Documentation/CodingStyle
+++ b/Documentation/CodingStyle
@@ -643,8 +643,26 @@ Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided.
 There are a number of driver model diagnostic macros in <linux/device.h>
 which you should use to make sure messages are matched to the right device
 and driver, and are tagged with the right level:  dev_err(), dev_warn(),
-dev_info(), and so forth.  For messages that aren't associated with a
-particular device, <linux/kernel.h> defines pr_debug() and pr_info().
+dev_info(), and so forth.
+
+A number of people often like to define their own debugging printf's,
+wrapping printk's in #ifdef's that get turned on only when subsystem
+debugging is compiled in (e.g., dprintk, Dprintk, DPRINTK, etc.).  Please
+don't reinvent the wheel but use existing mechanisms.  For messages that
+aren't associated with a particular device, <linux/kernel.h> defines
+pr_debug() and pr_info(); the latter two translate to printk(KERN_DEBUG) and
+printk(KERN_INFO), respectively.  However, to get pr_debug() to actually
+emit the message, you'll need to turn on DEBUG in your code, which can be
+done as follows in your subsystem Makefile:
+
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_WHATEVER_DEBUG),y)
+EXTRA_CFLAGS += -DDEBUG
+endif
+
+In this way, you can create a Kconfig parameter to turn on debugging at
+compile time, which will also turn on DEBUG, to enable pr_debug() to emit
+actual messages; conversely, when CONFIG_WHATEVER_DEBUG is off, DEBUG is
+off, and pr_debug() will display nothing.
 
 Coming up with good debugging messages can be quite a challenge; and once
 you have them, they can be a huge help for remote troubleshooting.  Such
@@ -779,6 +797,69 @@ includes markers for indentation and mode configuration.  People may use their
 own custom mode, or may have some other magic method for making indentation
 work correctly.
 
+		Chapter 19: branch prediction optimizations
+
+The kernel includes macros called likely() and unlikely(), which can be used
+as hints to the compiler to optimize branch prediction.  They operate by
+asking gcc to shuffle the code around so that the more favorable outcome
+executes linearly, avoiding a JMP instruction; this can improve cache
+pipeline efficiency.  For technical details how these macros work, see the
+References section at the end of this document.
+
+An example use of this as as follows:
+
+	ptr = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (unlikely(!ptr))
+		...
+
+or
+	err = some_function(...);
+	if (likely(!err))
+		...
+
+The main two problems with using un/likely() are that (a) programmers can
+easily be wrong about their code's likelihood to take one branch
+vs. another, and (b) on average, gcc will do a much better job optimizing
+branches that the programmer can.  The benefit on some systems for
+predicting correctly can be in saving a few instructions.  But the penalty
+for wrong use of un/likely() can be very significant (possibly dozens of
+instructions), as you may be doing a JMP instruction, hurting your pipeline
+cache, EACH time you get to the branch in question!
+
+Therefore, use un/likely() sparingly, consider it primarily for hot paths,
+use it only when you are certain that the condition in question rarely
+happens, be sure that it happens with roughly the same probability under
+most/all user conditions.  One rule of thumb suggested is that the
+probability of the branch un/taken should exceed 99% (although some would
+consider 95% as well).  Of course, beware of silly mistakes such as
+intending to use likely() and using unlikely() instead.
+
+A good example of this is the above kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL) call.  The chances
+of kmalloc() returning NULL are rather small, because even if it doesn't
+have memory to return to you at the moment, with GFP_KERNEL/__GFP_WAIT
+passed, kmalloc() will wait and suspend your thread, while it goes off to
+find some free memory (purging caches, flushing buffers, etc.).  In other
+words, kmalloc() tries very hard to give you the memory you asked for by the
+time it return.
+
+Consider the next, bad example.  Suppose you're developing a file system
+which performs logically different actions on different types of entities:
+files, directories, symlinks, devices, etc. and you use this code:
+
+	if (unlikely(S_ISBLK(mode))
+		...
+
+On first glance, the above use of unlikely() seems right.  After all, most
+file system objects are files and directories, and very few of them tend to
+be block devices.  So this optimization should work well, no?  Although it's
+true that it'll work well for most users, what about some user who happens
+to have a file system with lots of block devices?  Or what if the user has
+only one block device object on the file system, but the user has an
+application which causes the above conditional to be traversed very
+frequently (e.g., a shell script that deals with devices)?  Such users will
+be penalized heavily for going [sic] down the wrong path...  Therefore, you
+should consider also whether a seemingly-rare condition is indeed rare ALL
+the time.
 
 
 		Appendix I: References
@@ -804,6 +885,9 @@ language C, URL: http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/
 Kernel CodingStyle, by greg@kroah.com at OLS 2002:
 http://www.kroah.com/linux/talks/ols_2002_kernel_codingstyle_talk/html/
 
+FAQ/LikelyUnlikely:
+http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ/LikelyUnlikely
+
 --
 Last updated on 2007-July-13.
 
-- 
1.5.2.2


  reply	other threads:[~2007-09-28 21:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-28 21:31 [PATCH] 0/3 coding standards documentation/code updates Erez Zadok
2007-09-28 21:32 ` Erez Zadok [this message]
2007-09-28 21:46   ` [PATCH 1/3] CodingStyle updates Randy Dunlap
2007-09-29 14:43   ` Shawn Bohrer
2007-09-29 15:59   ` Scott Preece
2007-09-29 18:01   ` Randy Dunlap
2007-09-29 18:29     ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-09-29 20:21       ` [OT] kbuild syntax extension for ccflags and asflags (was: [PATCH 1/3] CodingStyle updates) Ingo Oeser
2007-09-29 20:24         ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-09-28 21:32 ` [PATCH 2/3] Update usage string for checkpatch.pl Erez Zadok
2007-09-28 21:32 ` [PATCH 3/3] New script to check coding-style compliance on multiple regular files Erez Zadok
2007-09-29 10:10   ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-09-29 18:18 ` [PATCH] 0/3 coding standards documentation/code updates Linus Torvalds
2007-09-29 19:56   ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-09-29 20:14     ` Randy Dunlap
2007-09-30  2:06     ` Theodore Tso
2007-09-30  3:28       ` Erez Zadok
2007-09-29 21:56   ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-09-30  0:23   ` Erez Zadok
2007-09-30  0:49     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-30  4:01       ` Erez Zadok
2007-09-30 17:40         ` Mark Lord
2007-09-30 17:59           ` Randy Dunlap
2007-09-30  2:24   ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-09-30  3:00     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-30  3:29       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-09-30  3:35         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-30 17:57         ` Theodore Tso
2007-09-30  3:27     ` Al Viro
2007-09-30  3:39       ` Valdis.Kletnieks

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=11910151223447-git-send-email-ezk@cs.sunysb.edu \
    --to=ezk@cs.sunysb.edu \
    --cc=12o3l@tiscali.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com \
    --cc=bunk@kernel.org \
    --cc=jengelh@computergmbh.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mrmacman_g4@mac.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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

Powered by JetHome