Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Morten Welinder <mwelinder@...>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <junkio@...>, Nicolas Pitre <nico@...>, Git Mailing List <git@...>
Date: Saturday, March 17, 2007 - 9:44 pm

On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

Btw, the reason I'm pretty sure that it's not a profiling bug is that
 (a) the rest of the profile looks fine
 (b) it actually matches the rest of the profile.

In particular, while you reacted to

	samples  %        app name                 symbol name
	41527    15.6550  git                      strlen

you didn't bat an eye on

	9240      3.4833  git                      get_mode
	8863      3.3412  git                      tree_entry_extract

ie over 3% of time spent in tree entry extract and get_mode. But take 
another look at that tree_entry_extract() function in particular and look 
what it does, and ask yourself: if *that* function takes up 3% of time, 
what does it tell you about strlen()?

(Side note: we could probably improve "strlen()" in particular. We 
sometimes call it twice: look at "entry_extract()", which calls strlen() 
on the tree entry extract, but then *also* calls strlen on the resulting 
path.

I suspect the

	a->pathlen = strlen(a->path);

could be written as

	a->pathlen = (char *)a->sha1 - (char *)a->path - 1;

but somebody should check that I didn't off-by-one or something. Also, it 
migt be better to make that part of "tree_entry_extract()" itself, because 
other callers do the same thing (see "find_tree_entry()": doing a 
"strlen()" on the path return of tree_entry_extract() seems to be a common 
pattern).

HOWEVER!

Once we get to *that* level of optimizations, we're doing pretty damn 
well. I'm sure we could probably cut down that strlen() from 16% to 8% by 
being smart about it, but still - this is a "good kind of problem" to 
have, if these things are your lowest-hanging fruit!

Maybe it all boils down to the same thing: I just can't seem to be really 
upset about "git log drivers/usb/ > /dev/null" taking all of a second. It 
just doesn't strike me as a performance problem ;)

			Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Thu Mar 15, 9:04 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Davide Libenzi, (Thu Mar 15, 9:33 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Davide Libenzi, (Thu Mar 15, 10:06 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Jeff Garzik, (Thu Mar 15, 9:11 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Thu Mar 15, 9:46 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Thu Mar 15, 9:54 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Davide Libenzi, (Thu Mar 15, 10:43 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Thu Mar 15, 10:56 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Davide Libenzi, (Thu Mar 15, 11:16 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Mar 16, 12:21 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Nicolas Pitre, (Fri Mar 16, 1:06 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Mar 16, 1:51 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Nicolas Pitre, (Fri Mar 16, 2:09 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Jeff Garzik, (Fri Mar 16, 12:35 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Shawn O. Pearce, (Fri Mar 16, 7:22 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Nicolas Pitre, (Fri Mar 16, 1:12 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Matt Mackall, (Fri Mar 16, 12:42 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Mar 16, 12:51 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Davide Libenzi, (Fri Mar 16, 12:24 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Mar 16, 12:35 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Davide Libenzi, (Fri Mar 16, 3:21 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Mar 16, 8:01 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Fri Mar 16, 9:11 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Nicolas Pitre, (Fri Mar 16, 11:28 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 1:55 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 3:40 pm)
[PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 3:44 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 6:44 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 5:45 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Morten Welinder, (Sat Mar 17, 9:14 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Avi Kivity, (Sun Mar 18, 2:28 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 9:29 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 9:44 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Nicolas Pitre, (Sat Mar 17, 9:38 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 9:55 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Nicolas Pitre, (Sat Mar 17, 10:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 10:20 pm)
[PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 11:06 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Junio C Hamano, (Sun Mar 18, 5:45 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Mar 18, 11:54 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Junio C Hamano, (Mon Mar 19, 11:16 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Mar 20, 12:31 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Shawn O. Pearce, (Tue Mar 20, 12:39 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Mar 20, 12:57 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Johannes Schindelin, (Mon Mar 19, 11:05 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Shawn O. Pearce, (Mon Mar 19, 11:29 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Shawn O. Pearce, (Mon Mar 19, 11:40 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Mar 20, 12:11 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Junio C Hamano, (Tue Mar 20, 1:44 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Shawn O. Pearce, (Tue Mar 20, 12:18 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Mar 20, 12:45 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Mar 18, 11:57 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Shawn O. Pearce, (Sun Mar 18, 5:38 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/2] Avoid unnecessary strlen() calls, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Mar 18, 5:48 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Nicolas Pitre, (Sat Mar 17, 11:00 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 11:31 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Robin Rosenberg, (Sun Mar 18, 6:53 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Mar 18, 1:34 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Robin Rosenberg, (Sun Mar 18, 2:29 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, David Brodsky, (Mon Mar 19, 9:16 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Robin Rosenberg, (Tue Mar 20, 2:35 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, David Brodsky, (Tue Mar 20, 5:13 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Tue Mar 20, 10:37 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Nicolas Pitre, (Tue Mar 20, 10:54 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Shawn O. Pearce, (Sun Mar 18, 5:25 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Julian Phillips, (Sun Mar 18, 1:30 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sun Mar 18, 1:23 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Junio C Hamano, (Sat Mar 17, 7:12 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 7:24 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Jon Smirl, (Sat Mar 17, 7:52 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Junio C Hamano, (Sat Mar 17, 6:37 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Nicolas Pitre, (Sat Mar 17, 9:13 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Junio C Hamano, (Sun Mar 18, 3:47 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 7:09 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Implement a simple delta_base cache, Linus Torvalds, (Sat Mar 17, 7:54 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Shawn O. Pearce, (Sat Mar 17, 1:19 am)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Matt Mackall, (Thu Mar 15, 9:14 pm)
Re: cleaner/better zlib sources?, Shawn O. Pearce, (Thu Mar 15, 9:10 pm)