From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Li,Rongqing" <lirongqing@baidu.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"vschneid@redhat.com" <vschneid@redhat.com>,
"mgorman@suse.de" <mgorman@suse.de>,
"bsegall@google.com" <bsegall@google.com>,
"dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"juri.lelli@redhat.com" <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [????] Re: [????] Re: divide error in x86 and cputime
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2025 10:58:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250708105839.4ed8c792@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250708021703.GD15787@redhat.com>
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 04:17:04 +0200
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/07, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 01:58:00 +0000
> > "Li,Rongqing" <lirongqing@baidu.com> wrote:
> >
> > > But mul_u64_u64_div_u64() for x86 should not trigger a division error panic,
> > maybe should return a ULLONG_MAX on #DE (like non-x86 mul_u64_u64_div_u64(),)
> >
> > Perhaps.
>
> So do you think
>
> static inline u64 mul_u64_u64_div_u64(u64 a, u64 mul, u64 div)
> {
> int ok = 0;
> u64 q;
>
> asm ("mulq %3; 1: divq %4; movl $1,%1; 2:\n"
> _ASM_EXTABLE(1b, 2b)
> : "=a" (q), "+r" (ok)
> : "a" (a), "rm" (mul), "rm" (div)
> : "rdx");
>
> return ok ? q : -1ul;
You need to decide what to return/do when 'div' is zero.
So perhaps:
if (ok)
return q;
BUG_ON(!div);
return ~(u64)0;
But maybe 0/0 should return 0.
> }
>
> makes sense at least for consistency with the generic implementation
> in lib/math/div64.c ?
I don't like the way the current version handles divide by zero at all.
Even forcing the cpu to execute a 'divide by zero' doesn't seem right.
The result should be well defined (and useful).
It might even be worth adding an extra parameter to report overflow
and return ~0 for overflow and 0 for divide by zero (I think that is
less likely to cause grief in the following instructions).
That does 'pass the buck' to the caller.
>
> > But it is still producing garbage.
>
> Agreed. And not a solution to this particular problem.
Using mul_u64_u_64_div_u64() here is also horribly expensive for a
simple split between (IIRC) utime and stime.
It isn't too bad on x86-64, but everywhere else it is horrid.
For 'random' values the code hits 900 clocks on x86-32 - and that
is in userspace with cmov and %ebp as a general register.
My new version is ~230 for x86-32 and ~130 for x86-64 (not doing
the fast asm) on ivy bridge, ~80 for x86-64 on zen5.
(I'm on holiday and have limited systems available.)
David
>
> Oleg.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-08 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-07 8:14 Li,Rongqing
2025-07-07 15:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-07 22:09 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-07 22:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-07 22:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-07 23:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-08 11:00 ` David Laight
2025-07-08 1:40 ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08 1:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08 1:58 ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08 2:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08 2:17 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-08 9:58 ` David Laight [this message]
2025-07-07 22:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2025-07-07 23:41 ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-07 23:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08 0:10 ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08 0:30 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08 1:17 ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08 1:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-08 10:35 ` [????] Re: [????] " David Laight
2025-07-08 11:12 ` 答复: [????] " Li,Rongqing
2025-07-08 0:23 ` 答复: " Li,Rongqing
2026-01-04 13:23 ` Xia Fukun
2026-01-04 14:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-01-04 18:15 ` David Laight
2026-01-04 20:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-01-04 22:03 ` David Laight
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=20250708105839.4ed8c792@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lirongqing@baidu.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
/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®