Re: [PATCH 2/9] lib/group_cpus: optimize inner loop in grp_spread_init_one()

From: Ming Lei
Date: Fri Jan 19 2024 - 22:17:25 EST


On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 06:50:46PM -0800, Yury Norov wrote:
> The loop starts from the beginning every time we switch to the next
> sibling mask. This is the Schlemiel the Painter's style of coding
> because we know for sure that nmsk is clear up to current CPU, and we
> can just continue from the next CPU.
>
> Also, we can do it nicer if leverage the dedicated for_each() iterator,
> and simplify the logic of clearing a bit in nmsk.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> lib/group_cpus.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/group_cpus.c b/lib/group_cpus.c
> index ee272c4cefcc..063ed9ae1b8d 100644
> --- a/lib/group_cpus.c
> +++ b/lib/group_cpus.c
> @@ -30,14 +30,14 @@ static void grp_spread_init_one(struct cpumask *irqmsk, struct cpumask *nmsk,
>
> /* If the cpu has siblings, use them first */
> siblmsk = topology_sibling_cpumask(cpu);
> - for (sibl = -1; cpus_per_grp > 0; ) {
> - sibl = cpumask_next(sibl, siblmsk);
> - if (sibl >= nr_cpu_ids)
> - break;
> - if (!cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(sibl, nmsk))
> - continue;
> + sibl = cpu + 1;

No, it is silly to let 'sibl' point to 'cpu + 1', cause we just
want to iterate over 'siblmsk & nmsk', and nothing to do with
the next cpu('cpu + 1').

> +
> + for_each_cpu_and_from(sibl, siblmsk, nmsk) {
> + if (cpus_per_grp-- == 0)
> + return;
> +
> + cpumask_clear_cpu(sibl, nmsk);
> cpumask_set_cpu(sibl, irqmsk);
> - cpus_per_grp--;

Andrew, please replace the 1st two patches with the following one: