Re: Should we be using unlikely() around tests of GFP_ZERO?
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Mon Jan 03 2011 - 08:45:59 EST
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 09:40 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Given the patches being busily submitted by trivial patch submitters to
> >> make use kmem_cache_zalloc(), et. al, I believe we should remove the
> >> unlikely() tests around the (gfp_flags & __GFP_ZERO) tests, such as:
> >>
> >> - if (unlikely((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && objp))
> >> + if ((flags & __GFP_ZERO) && objp)
> >> memset(objp, 0, obj_size(cachep));
> >>
> >> Agreed? If so, I'll send a patch...
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I support it.
>
> I guess the rationale here is that if you're going to take the hit of
> memset() you can take the hit of unlikely() as well. We're optimizing
> for hot call-sites that allocate a small amount of memory and
> initialize everything themselves. That said, I don't think the
> unlikely() annotation matters much either way and am for removing it
> unless people object to that.
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 5:46 AM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Recently Steven tried to gather the information.
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1072767
> > Maybe he might have a number for that.
>
> That would be interesting, sure.
Note, you could do it yourself too. Just enable:
Kernel Hacking -> Tracers -> Branch Profiling
(Trace likely/unlikely profiler)
CONFIG_PROFILE_ANNOTATED_BRANCHES
Then search /debug/tracing/trace_stats/branch_annotated.
(hmm, the help in Kconfig is wrong, I need to fix that)
Anyway, here's my box. I just started it an hour ago, and have not been
doing too much on it yet. But here's what I got (using SLUB)
correct incorrect % Function File Line
------- --------- - -------- ---- ----
6890998 2784830 28 slab_alloc slub.c 1719
That's incorrect 28% of the time.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/