Re: [PATCH] hrtimer: Replace cpu_base->active_bases with a direct check of the active list

[Ingo Molnar]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 08:28:41AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Btw., does cpu_base->active_bases even make sense? hrtimer bases are 
> > fundamentally percpu, and to check whether there are any pending 
> > timers is a very simple check:
> > 
> > 	base->active->next != NULL
> > 
> 
> Yeah, that's 3 pointer dereferences from cpu_base, iow you traded a 
> single bit test on an already loaded word for 3 potential cacheline 
> misses.

But the clock bases are not aligned to cachelines, and we have 4 of 
them. So in practice when we access one, we'll load the next one 
anyway.

Furthermore the simplification is measurable, and a fair bit of it is 
in various fast paths. I'd rather trade a bit of a cacheline footprint 
for less overall complexity and faster code.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/