Re: [tip:sched/core] sched: Lower chances of cputime scaling overflow

From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Thu Apr 11 2013 - 11:38:43 EST


On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-26 at 15:01 +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
>> Thoughts?
>
> Would something like the below work?

Ugh, this is hard to think about, it's also fairly inefficient.

> static cputime_t scale_stime(u64 stime, u64 rtime, u64 total)
> {
> - u64 rem, res, scaled;
> + int stime_fls = fls64(stime);
> + int total_fls = fls64(total);
> + int rtime_fls = fls64(rtime);

Doing "fls64()" unconditionally is quite expensive on some
architectures, and if I am not mistaken, the *common* case (by far) is
that all these values fit in 32 bits, no?

So let's re-think the whole thing entirely. First, let's throw away
the uncommon case, and we'll come back to it later:

if (unlikely((stime | total | rtime) >> 32)
return uncommon_case(stime, total, rtime);

and now we know we have the simple case where everything is in 32
bits, and we can just do the trivial

/* Make sure gcc understands that this is a 32x32->64 multiply,
followed by a 64/32->64 divide */
return div_u64((u64) (u32) stime * (u64) (u32) rtime, (u32)total);

which is the *cheapest* possible case of scale_stime(), with the
simplified multiply and divide. Agreed? This is cheap even on 32-bit.
Well, relatively.

Do we agree that this is (a) the common case that we need to worry
about from performance and (b) simple, understandable and efficient?

Now, let's look at the uncommon case, and I lied, I'm not going to
actually do it as a "uncommon_case()" function, I'm going to do this
as a "let us simplify the uncommon case until it *looks* like the
common case". IOW, in this uncommon thing, the aim is simply to just
reduce stime/rtime/total to the point where they are 32 bits. Ok? And
let's keep it simple again.

So *now*, once we are in the uncommon case, let's start counting bits.
Like this:

/* We know one of the values has a bit set in the high 32 bits */
for (;;) {
/* Make sure "stime" is the bigger of stime/rtime */
if (rtime > stime) {
u64 tmp = stime; stime = rtime; rtime = tmp;
}

/* Do we need to balance stime/rtime bits? */
if (stime >> 32) {
if (rtime >> 31)
goto drop_precision;

/* We can grow rtime and shrink stime and try to make them
both fit */
rtime <<= 1;
stime >>= 1;
continue;
}

/* stime/rtime fits in 32 bits, how about total? */
if (!(total >> 32))
break;

drop_precision:
/* We drop from stime, it has more bits than rtime */
stime >>= 1;
total >>= 1;
}

The above is totally untested, but each step is pretty damn simple and
fairly cheap. Sure, it's a loop, but it's bounded to 32 (cheap)
iterations, and the normal case is that it's not done at all, or done
only a few times.

And the advantage is that the end result is always that simple
32x32/32 case that we started out with as the common case.

I dunno. Maybe I'm overlooking something, and the above is horrible,
but the above seems reasonably efficient if not optimal, and
*understandable*.

Linus
--
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/