netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Leslie Monis' <lesliemonis@gmail.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] net: sched: pie: fix 64-bit division
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 10:10:33 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <387a2fe8539c4de7bf3f97aadbd9b924@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190227161228.GA2014@Inspiron-3521>

From: Leslie Monis
> Sent: 27 February 2019 16:12
> 
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 10:11:14AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Leslie Monis
> > > Sent: 27 February 2019 01:00
> > > Use div_u64() to resolve build failures on 32-bit platforms.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 3f7ae5f3dc52 ("net: sched: pie: add more cases to auto-tune alpha and beta")
> > > Signed-off-by: Leslie Monis <lesliemonis@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  net/sched/sch_pie.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/sched/sch_pie.c b/net/sched/sch_pie.c
> > > index 4c0670b6aec1..f93cfe034c72 100644
> > > --- a/net/sched/sch_pie.c
> > > +++ b/net/sched/sch_pie.c
> > > @@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ static void calculate_probability(struct Qdisc *sch)
> > >  	 */
> > >
> > >  	if (qdelay == 0 && qdelay_old == 0 && update_prob)
> > > -		q->vars.prob = (q->vars.prob * 98) / 100;
> > > +		q->vars.prob = 98 * div_u64(q->vars.prob, 100);
> >
> > This has significantly different rounding after the change.
> > The result for small values is very different.
> > The alterative:
> > 		q->vars.prob -= div_u64(q->vars.prob, 50);
> > is much nearer to the original - but never goes to zero.
> >
> > If the 98% decay factor isn't critical then you could remove
> > 1/64th or 1/32nd + 1/16th to avoid the slow division.
> >
> > 	David
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> You're right, the change does make the result for small
> values different. I made it anyway as the probability
> value is scaled by u64. It is safe to say that q->vars.prob
> holds relatively large values (in its scaled form) in all
> cases where it isn't 0.
> 
> But, I think we can avoid the slow division here. RFC 8033
> does say that using (1 - 1/64) should be sufficient. This
> will give us:
> 	q-vars.prob -= q->vars.prob >> 6;
> which I feel would be much better. What do you reckon?

I think I'd leave it as a division - the compiler should do the shift.
So:
	/* Scale by 98.4% */
	q-vars.prob -= q->vars.prob / 64u;

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)


  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-28 10:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-27  1:00 [PATCH net-next] net: sched: pie: fix 64-bit division Leslie Monis
2019-02-27  1:53 ` Randy Dunlap
2019-02-27  2:55 ` David Miller
2019-02-27 10:11 ` David Laight
2019-02-27 16:12   ` Leslie Monis
2019-02-28 10:10     ` David Laight [this message]
2019-02-28 10:16       ` Leslie Monis

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=387a2fe8539c4de7bf3f97aadbd9b924@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=lesliemonis@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).