Re: [patch 05/24] perfmon: X86 generic code (x86)

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, stephane eranian wrote:
> > What a nonsense. We have a bitmask already. Why not iterate over the
> > bitmask and be done ?
> >
> 
> Bitmask can be sparsed. Num represents the number of bits we have to find.
> The idea is that we don't need to scan the entire bitmask, we stop as soon as
> we have found all the bits we care about (i.e., all the bits that are set).
> 
> Example:
>          num = 3
>      bitmask=0000000010001001
>                                     ^ we will iterate until we are
> done with that bit.

Errm.

#define for_each_bit(bit, addr, size) \
        for ((bit) = find_first_bit((addr), (size)); \
             (bit) < (size); \
             (bit) = find_next_bit((addr), (size), (bit) + 1))

find_first_bit() and find_next_bit() are single instructions on most
architectures. "size" is known upfront at setup time of the
context/set and can be cached.

This takes exactly 3 iterations, while your method needs 8. And it
gets worse with the following example:

Example:
  num = 1
  bitmask=1000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 00000

          ^ you will iterate until we are done with that bit (32 times)
	 
  for_each_bit() will iterate exactly _once_.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/