lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched/cputime: make scale_stime() more precise
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 04:03:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 07/19, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Included below is also an x86_64 implementation in 2 instructions.
>
> But we need the arch-neutral implementation anyway, the code above
> is the best I could invent.

Agreed; we do. Depending on the cost of division and if the arch has a
64x64->128 mult, it might be better to compute a reciprocal and multiply
that, but yes, long staring didn't get me much better ideas either.

> But see below!
>
> > I'm still trying see if there's anything saner we can do...
>
> Oh, please, it is not that I like my solution very much, I would like
> to see something more clever.
>
> > static noinline u64 mul_u64_u64_div_u64(u64 a, u64 b, u64 c)
> > {
> > u64 q;
> > asm ("mulq %2; divq %3" : "=a" (q) : "a" (a), "rm" (b), "rm" (c) : "rdx");
> > return q;
> > }
>
> Heh. I have to admit that I didn't know that divq divides 128bit by
> 64bit. gcc calls the __udivti3 intrinsic in this case so I wrongly
> came to conclusion this is not simple even on x86_64. Plus the fact
> that linux/math64.h only has mul_u64_u64_shr()...

C wants to promote the dividend and divisor to the same type (int128)
and then it runs into trouble.

But yeah, I don't know how many other 64bit archs can pull off that
trick. I asked, and ARGH64 cannot do that 128/64 (although it can do a
64x64->128 in two instructions).

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-22 21:46    [W:0.121 / U:3.392 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site