2023-05-22 21:09:00

by David Howells

Subject: [PATCH v21 2/6] block: Fix bio_flagged() so that gcc can better optimise it

Fix bio_flagged() so that multiple instances of it, such as:

if (bio_flagged(bio, BIO_PAGE_REFFED) ||
bio_flagged(bio, BIO_PAGE_PINNED))

can be combined by the gcc optimiser into a single test in assembly
(arguably, this is a compiler optimisation issue[1]).

The missed optimisation stems from bio_flagged() comparing the result of
the bitwise-AND to zero. This results in an out-of-line bio_release_page()
being compiled to something like:

<+0>: mov 0x14(%rdi),%eax
<+3>: test $0x1,%al
<+5>: jne 0xffffffff816dac53 <bio_release_pages+11>
<+7>: test $0x2,%al
<+9>: je 0xffffffff816dac5c <bio_release_pages+20>
<+11>: movzbl %sil,%esi
<+15>: jmp 0xffffffff816daba1 <__bio_release_pages>
<+20>: jmp 0xffffffff81d0b800 <__x86_return_thunk>

However, the test is superfluous as the return type is bool. Removing it
results in:

<+0>: testb $0x3,0x14(%rdi)
<+4>: je 0xffffffff816e4af4 <bio_release_pages+15>
<+6>: movzbl %sil,%esi
<+10>: jmp 0xffffffff816dab7c <__bio_release_pages>
<+15>: jmp 0xffffffff81d0b7c0 <__x86_return_thunk>

instead.

Also, the MOVZBL instruction looks unnecessary[2] - I think it's just
're-booling' the mark_dirty parameter.

Signed-off-by: David Howells <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
cc: [email protected]
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108370 [1]
Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108371 [2]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/167391056756.2311931.356007731815807265.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk/ # v6
---
include/linux/bio.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bio.h b/include/linux/bio.h
index b3e7529ff55e..7f53be035cf0 100644
--- a/include/linux/bio.h
+++ b/include/linux/bio.h
@@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static inline void bio_cnt_set(struct bio *bio, unsigned int count)

static inline bool bio_flagged(struct bio *bio, unsigned int bit)
{
- return (bio->bi_flags & (1U << bit)) != 0;
+ return bio->bi_flags & (1U << bit);
}

static inline void bio_set_flag(struct bio *bio, unsigned int bit)

2023-05-23 08:17:09

by Jan Kara

Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 2/6] block: Fix bio_flagged() so that gcc can better optimise it

On Mon 22-05-23 21:57:40, David Howells wrote:
> Fix bio_flagged() so that multiple instances of it, such as:
>
> if (bio_flagged(bio, BIO_PAGE_REFFED) ||
> bio_flagged(bio, BIO_PAGE_PINNED))
>
> can be combined by the gcc optimiser into a single test in assembly
> (arguably, this is a compiler optimisation issue[1]).
>
> The missed optimisation stems from bio_flagged() comparing the result of
> the bitwise-AND to zero. This results in an out-of-line bio_release_page()
> being compiled to something like:
>
> <+0>: mov 0x14(%rdi),%eax
> <+3>: test $0x1,%al
> <+5>: jne 0xffffffff816dac53 <bio_release_pages+11>
> <+7>: test $0x2,%al
> <+9>: je 0xffffffff816dac5c <bio_release_pages+20>
> <+11>: movzbl %sil,%esi
> <+15>: jmp 0xffffffff816daba1 <__bio_release_pages>
> <+20>: jmp 0xffffffff81d0b800 <__x86_return_thunk>
>
> However, the test is superfluous as the return type is bool. Removing it
> results in:
>
> <+0>: testb $0x3,0x14(%rdi)
> <+4>: je 0xffffffff816e4af4 <bio_release_pages+15>
> <+6>: movzbl %sil,%esi
> <+10>: jmp 0xffffffff816dab7c <__bio_release_pages>
> <+15>: jmp 0xffffffff81d0b7c0 <__x86_return_thunk>
>
> instead.
>
> Also, the MOVZBL instruction looks unnecessary[2] - I think it's just
> 're-booling' the mark_dirty parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
> cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> cc: [email protected]
> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108370 [1]
> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108371 [2]
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/167391056756.2311931.356007731815807265.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk/ # v6

Sure. Feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>

Honza

> ---
> include/linux/bio.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bio.h b/include/linux/bio.h
> index b3e7529ff55e..7f53be035cf0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bio.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bio.h
> @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static inline void bio_cnt_set(struct bio *bio, unsigned int count)
>
> static inline bool bio_flagged(struct bio *bio, unsigned int bit)
> {
> - return (bio->bi_flags & (1U << bit)) != 0;
> + return bio->bi_flags & (1U << bit);
> }
>
> static inline void bio_set_flag(struct bio *bio, unsigned int bit)
>
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR

2023-05-23 13:12:33

by Christian Brauner

Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 2/6] block: Fix bio_flagged() so that gcc can better optimise it

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 09:57:40PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Fix bio_flagged() so that multiple instances of it, such as:
>
> if (bio_flagged(bio, BIO_PAGE_REFFED) ||
> bio_flagged(bio, BIO_PAGE_PINNED))
>
> can be combined by the gcc optimiser into a single test in assembly
> (arguably, this is a compiler optimisation issue[1]).
>
> The missed optimisation stems from bio_flagged() comparing the result of
> the bitwise-AND to zero. This results in an out-of-line bio_release_page()
> being compiled to something like:
>
> <+0>: mov 0x14(%rdi),%eax
> <+3>: test $0x1,%al
> <+5>: jne 0xffffffff816dac53 <bio_release_pages+11>
> <+7>: test $0x2,%al
> <+9>: je 0xffffffff816dac5c <bio_release_pages+20>
> <+11>: movzbl %sil,%esi
> <+15>: jmp 0xffffffff816daba1 <__bio_release_pages>
> <+20>: jmp 0xffffffff81d0b800 <__x86_return_thunk>
>
> However, the test is superfluous as the return type is bool. Removing it
> results in:
>
> <+0>: testb $0x3,0x14(%rdi)
> <+4>: je 0xffffffff816e4af4 <bio_release_pages+15>
> <+6>: movzbl %sil,%esi
> <+10>: jmp 0xffffffff816dab7c <__bio_release_pages>
> <+15>: jmp 0xffffffff81d0b7c0 <__x86_return_thunk>
>
> instead.
>
> Also, the MOVZBL instruction looks unnecessary[2] - I think it's just
> 're-booling' the mark_dirty parameter.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]>
> cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>
> cc: [email protected]
> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108370 [1]
> Link: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108371 [2]
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/167391056756.2311931.356007731815807265.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk/ # v6
> ---

Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>