Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1643896
| From | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() |
| Date | 2017-05-18 09:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tInT5-6TZ-35@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tH67U-4Wy-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <tH67U-4Wy-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <tHqJk-1Wb-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <tHGbn-3ia-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tInT5-6TZ-37@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
* Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 10:30:42AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> wrote: > > > > > I collected about 700 results in dmesg, and took 600 fastest. > > > For the vanilla kernel, the average value is 368, and for patched > > > kernel it is 388. It's 5% slower. But the standard deviation is > > > really big for both series' - 131 and 106 cycles respectively, which > > > is ~ 30%. And so, my conclusion is: there's no benefit in using > > > sched_find_first_bit() comparing to find_first_bit(). > > > > Erm, so you in essence claim: > > > > "according to measurements the new code is 5% slower, with a high, 30% > > stddev, hence the new code is better!" > > > > Basic logic fail... > > > > Thanks, > > > > Ingo > > No, in essence I claim that scatter is so big (in both cases, and in > case of vanilla kernel even bigger) that 5% is not a meaningful > difference. To be specific - new measured value is inside the > confidence interval of previous one. Firstly, the high spread is due to the poor measurement method: by increasing the number of measurements the standard deviation can be reduced. Secondly, and most importantly, the claim you made based on the numbers is simply false: > > > And so, my conclusion is: there's no benefit in using > > > sched_find_first_bit() comparing to find_first_bit(). you _measured no benefit_, and in fact the result you got is leaning towards it being a benefit. When doing a proper measurement it might strengthen, vanish or turn around - we simply don't know. Thanks, Ingo
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-05-14 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-05-15 18:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-05-15 22:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-05-15 23:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-05-16 10:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH] sched: remove sched_find_first_bit() Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2017-05-18 09:20 +0200
csiph-web