mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sebastien.dugue@bull.net,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: add prefetching to do_csum
Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 11:17:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <527D38D5.7010408@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131108190710.GC16052@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>

On 11/08/2013 11:07 AM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 08:51:07AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 11:25 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:07:38PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 15:02 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 09:19:23AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>> []
>>>>>> __always_inline instead of inline
>>>>>> static __always_inline void prefetch_lines(const void *addr, size_t len)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> 	const void *end = addr + len;
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> buff doesn't need a void * cast in prefetch_lines
>>>>>>
>>>>> Actually I take back what I said here, we do need the cast, not for a conversion
>>>>> from unsigned char * to void *, but rather to discard the const qualifier
>>>>> without making the compiler complain.
>>>>
>>>> Not if the function is changed to const void *
>>>> and end is also const void * as shown.
>>>>
>>> Addr is incremented in the for loop, so it can't be const.  I could add a loop
>>> counter variable on the stack, but that doesn't seem like it would help anything
>>
>> Perhaps you meant
>> 	void * const addr;
>> but that's not what I wrote.
>>
> No, I meant smoething like:
> static __always_inline void prefetch_lines(const void * addr, size_t len)
> {
> 	const void *tmp = (void *)addr;
> 	...
> 	for(;tmp<end; tmp+=cache_line_size())
> 	...
> }
> 
>> Let me know if this doesn't compile.
>> It does here...
> Huh, it does.  But that makes very little sense to me.  by qualifying addr as
> const, how is the compiler not throwing a warning in the for loop about us
> incrementing that same variable?
> 

As Joe is pointing out, you are confusing "const foo *tmp" with "foo *
const tmp".  The former means: "tmp is a variable pointing to type const
foo".  The latter means: "tmp is a constant pointing to type foo".

There is no problem modifying tmp in the former case; it prohibits
modifying *tmp.  In the latter case modifying tmp is prohibited, but
modifying *tmp is just fine.

Now, "const char *" would arguably be more correct here since arithmetic
on void is a gcc extension, but the same argument applies there.

	-hpa



  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-11-08 19:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 105+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-11 16:51 [PATCH] x86: Run checksumming in parallel accross multiple alu's Neil Horman
2013-10-12 17:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-13 12:53   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-14 20:28   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-14 21:19     ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-14 22:18       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-14 22:37         ` Joe Perches
2013-10-14 22:44           ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-14 22:49             ` Joe Perches
2013-10-15  7:41               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-15 10:51                 ` Borislav Petkov
2013-10-15 12:04                   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-15 16:21                 ` Joe Perches
2013-10-16  0:34                   ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-16  6:25                   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-16 16:55                     ` Joe Perches
2013-10-17  0:34         ` Neil Horman
2013-10-17  1:42           ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-18 16:50             ` Neil Horman
2013-10-18 17:20               ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-18 20:11                 ` Neil Horman
2013-10-18 21:15                   ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-20 21:29                     ` Neil Horman
2013-10-21 17:31                       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-21 17:46                         ` Neil Horman
2013-10-21 19:21                     ` Neil Horman
2013-10-21 19:44                       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-21 20:19                         ` Neil Horman
2013-10-26 12:01                           ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-26 13:58                             ` Neil Horman
2013-10-27  7:26                               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-27 17:05                                 ` Neil Horman
2013-10-17  8:41           ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-17 18:19             ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-10-17 18:48               ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-18  6:43               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-28 16:01             ` Neil Horman
2013-10-28 16:20               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-28 17:49                 ` Neil Horman
2013-10-28 16:24               ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-28 16:49                 ` David Ahern
2013-10-28 17:46                 ` Neil Horman
2013-10-28 18:29                   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29  8:25                     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-29 11:20                       ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29 11:30                         ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-29 11:49                           ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29 12:52                             ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-29 13:07                               ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29 13:11                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-29 13:20                                   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29 14:17                                   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29 14:27                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-29 20:26                                       ` Neil Horman
2013-10-31 10:22                                         ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-31 14:33                                           ` Neil Horman
2013-11-01  9:13                                             ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-01 14:06                                               ` Neil Horman
2013-10-29 14:12                               ` David Ahern
2013-10-15  7:32     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-15 13:14       ` Neil Horman
2013-10-12 22:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-10-13 12:53   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-18 16:42   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-18 17:09     ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-10-25 13:06       ` Neil Horman
2013-10-14  4:38 ` Andi Kleen
2013-10-14  7:49   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-14 21:07     ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-15 13:17       ` Neil Horman
2013-10-14 20:25   ` Neil Horman
2013-10-15  7:12     ` Sébastien Dugué
2013-10-15 13:33       ` Andi Kleen
2013-10-15 13:56         ` Sébastien Dugué
2013-10-15 14:06           ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-15 14:15             ` Sébastien Dugué
2013-10-15 14:26               ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-15 14:52                 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-15 16:02                   ` Andi Kleen
2013-10-16  0:28                     ` Eric Dumazet
2013-11-06 15:23 ` x86: Enhance perf checksum profiling and x86 implementation Neil Horman
2013-11-06 15:23   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] perf: Add csum benchmark tests to perf Neil Horman
2013-11-06 15:23   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: add prefetching to do_csum Neil Horman
2013-11-06 15:34     ` Dave Jones
2013-11-06 15:54       ` Neil Horman
2013-11-06 17:19         ` Joe Perches
2013-11-06 18:11           ` Neil Horman
2013-11-06 20:02           ` Neil Horman
2013-11-06 20:07             ` Joe Perches
2013-11-08 16:25               ` Neil Horman
2013-11-08 16:51                 ` Joe Perches
2013-11-08 19:07                   ` Neil Horman
2013-11-08 19:17                     ` Joe Perches
2013-11-08 20:08                       ` Neil Horman
2013-11-08 19:17                     ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-11-08 19:01           ` Neil Horman
2013-11-08 19:33             ` Joe Perches
2013-11-08 20:14               ` Neil Horman
2013-11-08 20:29                 ` Joe Perches
2013-11-11 19:40                   ` Neil Horman
2013-11-11 21:18                     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-06 18:23         ` Eric Dumazet
2013-11-06 18:59           ` Neil Horman
2013-11-06 20:19     ` Andi Kleen
2013-11-07 21:23       ` Neil Horman

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=527D38D5.7010408@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=sebastien.dugue@bull.net \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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