mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Juri Lelli <jlelli@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/smp_processor_id: Don't use cpumask_equal()
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 16:37:03 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <72d6418b-5f37-c527-1b0a-be5e0cc88f5a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191003201835.19903-1-longman@redhat.com>

On 10/3/19 4:18 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> The check_preemption_disabled() function uses cpumask_equal() to see
> if the task is bounded to the current CPU only. cpumask_equal() calls
> memcmp() to do the comparison. As x86 doesn't have __HAVE_ARCH_MEMCMP,
> the slow memcmp() function in lib/string.c is used.
>
> On a RT kernel that call check_preemption_disabled() very frequently,
> below is the perf-record output of a certain microbenchmark:
>
>   42.75%  2.45%  testpmd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] check_preemption_disabled
>   40.01% 39.97%  testpmd [kernel.kallsyms] [k] memcmp
>
> We should avoid calling memcmp() in performance critical path. So the
> cpumask_equal() call is now replaced with an equivalent check that
> makes no external function call.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
> ---
>  lib/smp_processor_id.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/smp_processor_id.c b/lib/smp_processor_id.c
> index 60ba93fc42ce..3fee05ac92f8 100644
> --- a/lib/smp_processor_id.c
> +++ b/lib/smp_processor_id.c
> @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ unsigned int check_preemption_disabled(const char *what1, const char *what2)
>  	 * Kernel threads bound to a single CPU can safely use
>  	 * smp_processor_id():
>  	 */
> -	if (cpumask_equal(current->cpus_ptr, cpumask_of(this_cpu)))
> +	if ((current->nr_cpus_allowed == 1) &&
> +	    cpumask_test_cpu(this_cpu, current->cpus_ptr))
>  		goto out;
>  
>  	/*

My bad. The second check isn't really necessary.

Cheers,
Longman


      reply	other threads:[~2019-10-03 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-03 20:18 Waiman Long
2019-10-03 20:37 ` Waiman Long [this message]

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=72d6418b-5f37-c527-1b0a-be5e0cc88f5a@redhat.com \
    --to=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=jlelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --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®