Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759850AbYGPWGP (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:06:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756039AbYGPWF6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:05:58 -0400 Received: from caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca ([129.97.134.17]:37898 "EHLO caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757600AbYGPWF5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:05:57 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 18:05:56 -0400 To: Soumyadip Das Mahapatra Cc: peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] : A better approach to compute int_sqrt in lib/int_sqrt.c Message-ID: <20080716220556.GI31126@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> References: <848307.13278.qm@web59505.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <848307.13278.qm@web59505.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3883 Lines: 117 On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 02:35:56PM -0700, Soumyadip Das Mahapatra wrote: > Thanks Peter for noticing :-) > Sorry, I should have it explained before. Really sorry > for that. Here are they... > > 0 It is better because > o it uses only one loop instead of two > o contains no division operator (older version has two) > which are surely comparatively slow task in computer > > 0 Currently find . -name '*.[ch]' | xargs grep int_sqrt gives me this > .... > ./fs/nfs/write.c: nfs_congestion_kb = (16*int_sqrt(totalram_pages)) << (PAGE_SHIFT-10); > ./drivers/video/fbmon.c: h_period = int_sqrt(h_period); > ./mm/page_alloc.c: min_free_kbytes = int_sqrt(lowmem_kbytes * 16); > ./mm/oom_kill.c: s = int_sqrt(cpu_time); > ./mm/oom_kill.c: s = int_sqrt(int_sqrt(run_time)); > .... > So this function works in critical computing sections like frame-buffer, paging. > Which means betterment of this function should not be ignored. > Besides, if there is a better way to do things then why should not we do that ? > > Anyways thanks :-) It is also very inaccurate: int_sqrt(9380489) returns 3062 with the old code and 146574 with the new code. I wonder which one is closer to right. It seems as soon as the input is 2^22 or higher, the new code goes all to hell and starts returning 2^16-1 or similarly silly values rather than 2^11-1 or similar. Here is how I tested: (compiled with gcc -Wall -O2 -std=c99) #include #include #include #define BITS_PER_LONG 32 unsigned long old_int_sqrt(unsigned long x) { unsigned long op, res, one; op = x; res = 0; one = 1UL << (BITS_PER_LONG - 2); while (one > op) one >>= 2; while (one != 0) { if (op >= res + one) { op = op - (res + one); res = res + 2 * one; } res /= 2; one /= 4; } return res; } unsigned long new_int_sqrt(unsigned long x) { unsigned long ub, lb, m; lb = 1; /* lower bound */ ub = (x >> 5) + 8; /* upper bound */ do { m = (ub + lb) >> 1; /* middle value */ if((m * m) > x) ub = m - 1; else lb = m + 1; } while(ub >= lb); return lb - 1; } int main() { unsigned long i; unsigned long old; unsigned long new; for(i=0;i<10000000;i++) { old=old_int_sqrt(i); new=new_int_sqrt(i); if(new!=old) { printf("sqrt(%lu)= %lu(new)->%llu %lu(old)->%llu",i,new,(unsigned long long)new*(unsigned long long)new,old,(unsigned long long)old*(unsigned long long)old); if(llabs((unsigned long long)new*(unsigned long long)new - (unsigned long long)i) < llabs((unsigned long long)old*(unsigned long long)old - (unsigned long long)i)) { printf(" (new is best)\n"); } else { printf(" (old is best)\n"); } } } return 0; } Example output: sqrt(9380468)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380469)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380470)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380471)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380472)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380473)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380474)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380475)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380476)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380477)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) sqrt(9380478)= 146574(new)->21483937476 3062(old)->9375844 (old is best) -- Len Sorensen -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/