Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <30ea2fa3-0e4d-788b-b990-3bdb9e687377@acm.org>
Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2022 09:29:21 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.3.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: simplify blksize_bits() implementation
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Dawei Li <set_pte_at@outlook.com>, axboe@kernel.dk
Cc:     hch@lst.de, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <TYCP286MB2323169D81A806A7C1F7FDF1CA309@TYCP286MB2323.JPNP286.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <TYCP286MB2323169D81A806A7C1F7FDF1CA309@TYCP286MB2323.JPNP286.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 10/26/22 08:14, Dawei Li wrote:
> Convert current looping-based implementation into bit operation,
> which can bring improvement for:
> 
> 1) bitops is more efficient for its arch-level optimization.

As far as I know blksize_bits() is not used in the hot path so 
performance of this function is not critical.

> 2) Given that blksize_bits() is inline, _if_ @size is compile-time
> constant, it's possible that order_base_2() _may_ make output
> compile-time evaluated, depending on code context and compiler behavior.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dawei Li <set_pte_at@outlook.com>
> ---
>   include/linux/blkdev.h | 7 +------
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> index 50e358a19d98..117061c8b9a1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
> @@ -1349,12 +1349,7 @@ static inline int blk_rq_aligned(struct request_queue *q, unsigned long addr,
>   /* assumes size > 256 */
>   static inline unsigned int blksize_bits(unsigned int size)
>   {
> -	unsigned int bits = 8;
> -	do {
> -		bits++;
> -		size >>= 1;
> -	} while (size > 256);
> -	return bits;
> +	return size > 512 ? order_base_2(size) : 9;
>   }

How about optimizing this function even further by eliminating the 
ternary operator, e.g. as follows (untested)?

         return order_base_2(size >> SECTOR_SHIFT) + SECTOR_SHIFT;

Thanks,

Bart.