Re: [PATCH] of: cache phandle nodes to decrease cost of of_find_node_by_phandle()

[Chintan Pandya]

On 2/5/2018 5:53 PM, Chintan Pandya wrote:
> > My question was trying to determine whether the numbers reported above
> > are for a debug configuration or a production configuration.
> My reported numbers are from debug configuration.
>
> > not a production configuration, I was requesting the numbers for a
> > production configuration.
> I'm working on it. But please expect some delay in my response for this. 
> As I mentioned earlier, I need to work with few teams to get these numbers.
>
>
> > show a significant boot time reduction from the patch then there is
> > less justification for adding complexity to the existing code. I
> > prefer to use simpler data structures and algorithms __if__ extra
> > complexity does not provide any advantage. The balance between
> > complexity and benefits is a core software engineering issue.
> Ok

Avg Kernel boot time comparison in production set up:

[0] Base: 4519ms
[1] 4115ms (~400ms improvement)
[2] 4115ms (~400ms improvement)
[3] 4177ms (~340ms improvement)

Full data:
[1] 1024 sized pre-populated cache
ITR-1	ITR-2	ITR-3	ITR-4	Avg
4115	4123	4124	4107	4115

[2] Dynamic sized cache allocation/free
ITR-1	ITR-2	ITR-3	ITR-4	Avg
4122	4131	4106	4118	4115

[3] Fixed 64 sized cache
ITR-1	ITR-2	ITR-3	ITR-4	Avg
4153	4186	4198	4181	4177


[1] is my experimental patch and dirty enough to not get merged 
anywhere. So, I will not push it.



Chintan
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center,
Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation
Collaborative Project