linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Chen Gang <chengang@emindsoft.com.cn>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
	mgorman@techsingularity.net, gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com,
	iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com,
	rientjes@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: migrate: Use bool instead of int for the return value of PageMovable
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 09:53:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160713075346.GC28723@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57851FC4.4000000@emindsoft.com.cn>

On Wed 13-07-16 00:50:12, Chen Gang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/12/16 15:48, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 12-07-16 03:47:42, Chen Gang wrote:
> > [...]
> >> In our case, the 2 output size are same, but under x86_64, the insns are
> >> different. After uses bool, it uses push/pop instead of branch, for me,
> >> it should be a little better for catching.
> > 
> > The code generated for bool version looks much worse. Look at the fast
> > path. Gcc tries to reuse the retq from the fast path in the bool case
> > and so it has to push rbp and rbx on the stack.
> > 
> > That being said, gcc doesn't seem to generate a better code for bool so
> > I do not think this is really worth it.
> >
> 
> The code below also merge 3 statements into 1 return statement, although
> for me, it is a little more readable, it will generate a little bad code.
> That is the reason why the output looks a little bad.
> 
> In our case, for gcc 6.0, using bool instead of int for bool function
> will get the same output under x86_64.

If the output is same then there is no reason to change it.

> In our case, for gcc 4.8, using bool instead of int for bool function
> will get a little better output under x86_64.

I had a different impression and the fast path code had more
instructions. But anyway, is there really a strong reason to change
those return values in the first place? Isn't that just a pointless code
churn?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-13  7:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-09 15:55 [PATCH] mm: migrate: Use bool instead of int for the return value of PageMovable chengang
2016-07-11  0:26 ` Minchan Kim
2016-07-11 19:47   ` Chen Gang
2016-07-12  7:15     ` Vlastimil Babka
2016-07-12 16:42       ` Chen Gang
2016-07-12  7:48     ` Michal Hocko
2016-07-12 16:50       ` Chen Gang
2016-07-13  7:53         ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-07-17  0:51           ` Chen Gang

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=20160713075346.GC28723@dhcp22.suse.cz \
    --to=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chengang@emindsoft.com.cn \
    --cc=gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com \
    --cc=gi-oh.kim@profitbricks.com \
    --cc=hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --cc=minchan@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /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).