[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block/io: optimize bdrv_co_pwritev for small re
From: |
Kevin Wolf |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] block/io: optimize bdrv_co_pwritev for small requests |
Date: |
Tue, 24 May 2016 16:22:22 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
Am 2.05.2016 um 16:07 hat Peter Lieven geschrieben:
> Am 24.05.2016 um 15:59 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> >
> >On 24/05/2016 15:39, Peter Lieven wrote:
> >> bytes += offset & (align - 1);
> >> offset = offset & ~(align - 1);
> >Because the low bits have been masked away from offset and added to bytes,
> >
> >>+
> >>+ /* if head and tail fall into the same alignment
> >>+ * we can omit the second read as it would read
> >>+ * the same block again */
> >>+ if ((offset + bytes) & (align - 1) &&
> >... the first part is just "bytes & (align - 1)"...
> >
> >>+ offset / align == (offset + bytes) / align) {
> >... and the second part is just "bytes < align" (you can distribute
> >division over addition because offset / align has no reminder, and
> >simplify to "0 == bytes / align").
> >
> >Putting it together, it becomes "bytes > 0 && bytes < align", or even
> >"bytes < align".
>
> Oh, thanks, and the if block also too complicated. If I am right it should
> collapse to:
>
> if (bytes < align) {
> qemu_iovec_add(&local_qiov, head_buf + bytes,
> align - bytes);
> bytes = align;
> }
>
> Right?
Looks good to me.
Another mostly unrelated thing I just noticed while looking at this
code: Should we assert(is_power_of_2(align)) somewhere?
Kevin