mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] time: Condense timekeeper.xtime into xtime_sec
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 06:54:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120303055411.GA3835@netboy.at.omicron.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1203021510540.20257@router.home>

On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 03:13:25PM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, John Stultz wrote:
> 
> > +static inline void tk_normalize_xtime(struct timekeeper *tk)
> > +{
> > +	while (tk->xtime_nsec >= ((u64)NSEC_PER_SEC << tk->shift)) {
> > +		tk->xtime_nsec -= (u64)NSEC_PER_SEC << tk->shift;
> > +		tk->xtime_sec++;
> > +	}
> > +}
> 
> Could we avoid the loop?
> 
> y = ((u64)NSEC_PER_SEC << tk->shift));
> tk->xtime_sec += tk->xtime_nsec / y;
> tk->xtime_nsec %= y;

But the two divisions are more costly than addition, substraction, and
shift.

(Normally the code loops just once.)

Richard

  reply	other threads:[~2012-03-03  5:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-02  7:12 [PATCH 0/9] Reduce timekeeping lock hold time v2 John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 1/9] time: Condense timekeeper.xtime into xtime_sec John Stultz
2012-03-02 21:13   ` Christoph Lameter
2012-03-03  5:54     ` Richard Cochran [this message]
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 2/9] time: Rework timekeeping functions to take timekeeper ptr as argument John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 3/9] time: Split timekeeper lock into separate reader/writer locks John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 4/9] time: Update timekeeper structure using a local shadow John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:38   ` Ingo Molnar
2012-03-02  7:53     ` John Stultz
2012-03-02  8:07       ` Ingo Molnar
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 5/9] time: Shadow cycle_last in timekeeper structure John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 6/9] time: Reduce timekeeper read lock hold time John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 7/9] time: Convert the timekeeper's wlock to a raw_spin_lock John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 8/9] time: Whitespace cleanups per Ingo's requests John Stultz
2012-03-02  7:12 ` [PATCH 9/9] time: Explicitly use u32 instead of int for shift values John Stultz

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=20120303055411.GA3835@netboy.at.omicron.at \
    --to=richardcochran@gmail.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®