From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] parent in ->d_compare() arguments
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 00:30:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160730233044.GZ2356@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFy3zGCSQpQ594WmN6kn1hxQzN8=pyQ3yXGezv+mWeAeog@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 01:44:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> No. Let's not. "smp_rmb()" is completely free on x86 (ok, so it's a
> instruction scheduling barrer - close enough), so trying to optimize
> away rmb's and replacing them with double compares sounds entirely
> misdesigned.
>
> Yes, yes, there are other architectures where rmb is much more
> expensive. But quite frankly, in most cases those architectures have
> broken synchronization to begin with ("synchronization is unusual, so
> let's not optimize it"). They'll fix it eventually.
>
> Instead, what we should look at, is to make raw_seqcount_begin() use a
> smp_load_acquire() on architectures where that is cheaper than the
> rmb.
>
> But again, I don't see the point of double-testing "parent" when a
> load-acquire or load+rmb _should_ be cheap (and absolutely is on x86).
Umm... Even on x86, a lot of hash chain elements will have ->d_parent
mismatch. Suppose rmb was a no-op; current code does
fetch ->d_seq
fetch ->d_parent
compare with register
branch taken to the end of body
while this would avoid the first fetch. On the entries with the same
->d_parent we'd do
fetch ->d_parent
compare with register
branch not taken
fetch ->d_seq
fetch ->d_parent
compare with register
branch (expectedly) not taken
which is the same as the mainline in terms of actual memory accesses and extra
3 insns. I suspect that the win on the entries with ->d_parent mismatch can
outweight that, but that needs profiling to verify.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-30 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-30 1:07 [RFC] parent in ->d_compare() arguments Al Viro
2016-07-30 20:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-07-30 23:30 ` Al Viro [this message]
2016-07-30 23:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-07-30 23:52 ` Al Viro
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=20160730233044.GZ2356@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).