[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations
From: |
Peter Lieven |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Mar 2013 16:37:15 +0100 |
Am 11.03.2013 um 16:29 schrieb Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>:
> Il 11/03/2013 16:24, Peter Lieven ha scritto:
>>
>>> How would that be different in your patch? But you can solve it by
>>> making two >= loops, one checking for 4*BITS_PER_LONG and one checking
>>> BITS_PER_LONG.
>>
>> This is what I have now:
>>
>> diff --git a/util/bitops.c b/util/bitops.c
>> index e72237a..b0dc93f 100644
>> --- a/util/bitops.c
>> +++ b/util/bitops.c
>> @@ -24,12 +24,13 @@ unsigned long find_next_bit(const unsigned long *addr,
>> unsigned long size,
>> const unsigned long *p = addr + BITOP_WORD(offset);
>> unsigned long result = offset & ~(BITS_PER_LONG-1);
>> unsigned long tmp;
>> + unsigned long d0,d1,d2,d3;
>>
>> if (offset >= size) {
>> return size;
>> }
>> size -= result;
>> - offset %= BITS_PER_LONG;
>> + offset &= (BITS_PER_LONG-1);
>> if (offset) {
>> tmp = *(p++);
>> tmp &= (~0UL << offset);
>> @@ -42,7 +43,19 @@ unsigned long find_next_bit(const unsigned long *addr,
>> unsigned long size,
>> size -= BITS_PER_LONG;
>> result += BITS_PER_LONG;
>> }
>> - while (size & ~(BITS_PER_LONG-1)) {
>> + while (size >= 4*BITS_PER_LONG) {
>> + d0 = *p;
>> + d1 = *(p+1);
>> + d2 = *(p+2);
>> + d3 = *(p+3);
>> + if (d0 || d1 || d2 || d3) {
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + p+=4;
>> + result += 4*BITS_PER_LONG;
>> + size -= 4*BITS_PER_LONG;
>> + }
>> + while (size >= BITS_PER_LONG) {
>> if ((tmp = *(p++))) {
>> goto found_middle;
>> }
>>
>
> Minus the %= vs. &=,
>
> Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
>
> Perhaps:
>
> tmp = *p;
> d1 = *(p+1);
> d2 = *(p+2);
> d3 = *(p+3);
> if (tmp) {
> goto found_middle;
> }
> if (d1 || d2 || d3) {
> break;
> }
i do not know what gcc interally makes of the d0 || d1 || d2 || d3 ?
i would guess its sth like one addition w/ carry and 1 test?
your proposed change would introduce 2 tests (maybe)?
what about this to be sure?
tmp = *p;
d1 = *(p+1);
d2 = *(p+2);
d3 = *(p+3);
if (tmp || d1 || d2 || d3) {
if (tmp) {
goto found_middle;
}
break;
}
Peter
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Maydell, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations,
Peter Lieven <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, ronnie sahlberg, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] bitops: unroll while loop in find_next_bit()., Peter Lieven, 2013/03/12
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Maydell, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Maydell, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/03/11
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] find_next_bit optimizations, Peter Lieven, 2013/03/11