Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-168977-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Yury Norov' <yury.norov@gmail.com>, Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>
CC: "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk" <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
	"n26122115@gs.ncku.edu.tw" <n26122115@gs.ncku.edu.tw>,
	"jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw" <jserv@ccns.ncku.edu.tw>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/2] lib/test_bitops: Add benchmark test for fns()
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v4 1/2] lib/test_bitops: Add benchmark test for fns()
Thread-Index: AQHam+S8XBnnR43Z8kaIhRcpvR0+crGIoopw
Date: Sun, 5 May 2024 13:11:53 +0000
Message-ID: <62fdb348791949c08e53936e3bc442b5@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <20240501132047.14536-1-visitorckw@gmail.com>
 <20240501132047.14536-2-visitorckw@gmail.com>
 <ZjJt9w2mvdm2P+dM@yury-ThinkPad>
In-Reply-To: <ZjJt9w2mvdm2P+dM@yury-ThinkPad>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

From: Yury Norov
> Sent: 01 May 2024 17:30
>=20
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 09:20:46PM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > Introduce a benchmark test for the fns(). It measures the total time
> > taken by fns() to process 1,000,000 test data generated using
> > get_random_bytes() for each n in the range [0, BITS_PER_LONG).
> >
> > example:
> > test_bitops: fns:          5876762553 ns, 64000000 iterations
>=20
> So... 5 seconds for a test sounds too much. I see the following patch
> improves it dramatically, but in general let's stay in a range of
> milliseconds. On other machines it may run much slower and trigger
> a stall watchdog.
>=20
> > Signed-off-by: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>
>=20
> Suggested-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
>=20
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v4:
> > - Correct get_random_long() -> get_random_bytes() in the commit
> >   message.
> >
> >  lib/test_bitops.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/test_bitops.c b/lib/test_bitops.c
> > index 3b7bcbee84db..ed939f124417 100644
> > --- a/lib/test_bitops.c
> > +++ b/lib/test_bitops.c
> > @@ -50,6 +50,26 @@ static unsigned long order_comb_long[][2] =3D {
> >  };
> >  #endif
> >
> > +static unsigned long buf[1000000];
>=20
> Can you make it __init, or allocate with kmalloc_array(), so that 64M
> of memory will not last forever in the kernel?
>=20
> > +static int __init test_fns(void)
> > +{
> > +=09unsigned int i, n;
> > +=09ktime_t time;
> > +
> > +=09get_random_bytes(buf, sizeof(buf));
> > +=09time =3D ktime_get();
> > +
> > +=09for (n =3D 0; n < BITS_PER_LONG; n++)
> > +=09=09for (i =3D 0; i < 1000000; i++)
> > +=09=09=09fns(buf[i], n);
>=20
> What concerns me here is that fns() is a in fact a const function, and
> the whole loop may be eliminated. Can you make sure it's not your case
> because 450x performance boost sounds a bit too much to me.
>=20
> You can declare a "static volatile __used __init" variable to assign
> the result of fns(), and ensure that the code is not eliminated

Yep, without 'c' this compiler to 'return 0'.

static inline unsigned long fns(unsigned long word, unsigned int n)
{
=09while (word && n--)
=09=09word &=3D word - 1;
=09return word ? __builtin_ffs(word) : 8 * sizeof (long);
}

unsigned long buf[1000000];

volatile int c;

int  test_fns(void)
{
=09unsigned int i, n;

=09for (n =3D 0; n < 8*sizeof (long); n++)
=09=09for (i =3D 0; i < 1000000; i++)
=09=09=09c =3D fns(buf[i], n);
=09return 0;
}

You are also hitting the random number generator.
It would be better to use a predictable sequence.
Then you could, for instance, add up all the fns() results
and check you get the expected value.

With a really trivial 'RNG' (like step a CRC one bit) you
could do it inside the loop and not nee a buffer at all.

=09David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1=
PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)