On Mon, 4 Jun 2007 16:12:35 +0200
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * Eric Dumazet <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > O(1) lookup doesnt imply it needs to be super-fast. You make a
> > confusion about this.
>
> Davide has written many good speedups for the kernel and he is one of
> the best scalability experts the Linux kernel has today. You could learn
> from Davide a thing or two, instead of lecturing him about O(1) ...
>
I know who is Davide, thank you :)
> For example, the recent futex.c changes you did in commit 34f01cc1 are,
> and unfortunately there's no better word i can find: plain disgusting.
> You apparently have plopped the 'fshared' code into the existing logic
> via conditionals and have blown up the complexity of the functions for
> no good reason - instead of neatly separating them out. You have added
> _33_ (thirty-three!) new 'if' branches to futex.c! The feature you
> introduced is nice and useful, but for heaven's sake please work on
> cleanliness of your code some more and undo that colossal damage ...
> preferably before working on other areas of the kernel.
>
This code took the normal path for inclusion and discussion. If you find it so horrible,
you should complained before. Fact is that you Acked it :)
If you wanted to make a joke, I find it quite misplaced.
> > O(128) is still O(1) for instance. Having to search a bit in a PAGE is
> > a sensible compromise, if we dont add overhead on each fget() calls.
>
> hm, i'm not sure what you are talking about here. Look at Davide's stuff
> - it's clearly not O(128)...
I am talking about my suggestion to use a bitmap search limited to one page.
So I named it O(128), this clearly should be labeled O(PAGE_SIZE/L1_CACHE_BYTES)
>
> > You add conditional branches on very hot spots.
> >
> > When you open/close a file, you need to access previous and next
> > cells, so you need 3 cache lines, exactly like current *legacy* code.
> > (one for file pointer, one on each bitmap flags(open/close_on_exec) )
>
> the fd spaces will be separated _no matter what_, that is a physical
> inevitability of the ABI in question. Whether you hide that into 'extra
> complexity by trying to bend bitmaps in a way that the new users dont
> need' or do it explicitly like Davide, i'll go for the explicit
> separation. Davide's approach, besides being cleaner, simpler and faster
> also has the advantage of enabling the possible demoting of the 'legacy'
> fd space in the future. Or demoting the 'new' fd space in the future, if
> the interface does not take off.
>
> Ingo
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
