From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
To: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@gmail.com>
Cc: Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andy@kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Oskar Schirmer <oskar@scara.com>, Yiyuan Guo <yguoaz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/math/rational.c: Fix divide by zero
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 12:02:52 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YKy9PHIbuhsomsTq@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+7tXiiogw+bWCj2=QiRBc+sp01dUh1j_mfLJC19CB6Wch0nuQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 01:17:48PM -0700, Trent Piepho wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 3:51 AM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 05:18:06PM -0700, Trent Piepho wrote:
> >
> > This misses the test cases (*). Please, develop them with Daniel.
> >
> > *) We usually don't accept changes in the generic libraries without test cases.
> >
> > Fixes tag?
>
> Is there a bug report on a tracker? I just got the email from Yigua.
Fixes tag refers to the existing commit that brought the bug.
Also you may need to add Reported-by tag since Yigua reported it.
...
> > I think that refactoring may lead us to check first iteration before even going
> > into the loop. But it's another story and we may do it later (the algo uses
>
> I started that, but it had no advantages and some disadvantages.
>
> Basically, there are three cases: too large, too small & closest to
> zero, too small & closest to non-zero. This code can handle those
> three cases by adding three branches, if(d1), if(n1), and if(!d1).
> The truth values we need already exist at this point the algorithm.
>
> If it's at the start, then there still needs to be the three branches
> for each case. But the values to test must be calculated too.
>
> What's more, it's possible that the value is exactly representable in
> the allowed range. That's actual appears to be the most common use
> case, reducing a fraction to lowest terms (*). By putting the tests
> in the "terminate because of limits" case, they don't need to happen
> when "terminate because exact value find" is the result. If the check
> was first, then it would always happen, even if it wouldn't have been
> necessary.
>
> And the time it took to find this bug shows us that out of bounds
> inputs are not a common case, so putting that on the hot path by
> checking it first at the expense of the reducing to lowest terms path
> doesn't make sense.
Thanks for detailed explanation of your view to the current state of the code.
As you noticed I am not insisting on refactoring or so, I was rather wondering
if it can be done in the future. Still we might need some performance tests.
Daniel, does KUnit have a capability to test performance?
Like running test case 1M times or so and calc average (median?) time of
execution.
> (*) One could write a reduce to lowest terms function with an easier
> interface. It could be a trivial one expression wrapper around
> rational_best_approximation(). It could also be a simpler function,
> but I think it would still perform the exact same sequence of
> divisions and moduli, so it wouldn't really make any difference.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-25 9:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-23 0:18 [PATCH] lib/math/rational.c: Fix divide by zero Trent Piepho
2021-05-24 10:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-05-24 16:55 ` Daniel Latypov
2021-05-24 22:04 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-05-24 22:56 ` Daniel Latypov
2021-05-24 23:30 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-05-24 23:38 ` Daniel Latypov
2021-05-25 0:42 ` David Gow
2021-05-25 1:49 ` Randy Dunlap
2021-05-25 1:57 ` David Gow
2021-05-25 5:08 ` Trent Piepho
2021-05-24 20:17 ` Trent Piepho
2021-05-24 20:35 ` Daniel Latypov
2021-05-25 9:02 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2021-05-25 9:21 ` Trent Piepho
2021-05-25 12:03 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-05-25 17:10 ` Daniel Latypov
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=YKy9PHIbuhsomsTq@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=dlatypov@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oskar@scara.com \
--cc=tpiepho@gmail.com \
--cc=yguoaz@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).