Avoid 64bit division in multilist index functions
The number of sublists in a multilist is relatively small. We dont need 64 bits to calculate an index. 32 bits is sufficient and makes the code more efficient. Reviewed-by: Matthew Ahrens <mahrens@delphix.com> Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov> Reviewed-by: Mark Maybee <mark.maybee@delphix.com> Signed-off-by: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> Sponsored-By: iXsystems, Inc. Closes #12288
This commit is contained in:
parent
4ebda5d4d3
commit
ea47857090
|
@ -7459,9 +7459,10 @@ arc_state_multilist_index_func(multilist_t *ml, void *obj)
|
||||||
* Also, the low order bits of the hash value are thought to be
|
* Also, the low order bits of the hash value are thought to be
|
||||||
* distributed evenly. Otherwise, in the case that the multilist
|
* distributed evenly. Otherwise, in the case that the multilist
|
||||||
* has a power of two number of sublists, each sublists' usage
|
* has a power of two number of sublists, each sublists' usage
|
||||||
* would not be evenly distributed.
|
* would not be evenly distributed. In this context full 64bit
|
||||||
|
* division would be a waste of time, so limit it to 32 bits.
|
||||||
*/
|
*/
|
||||||
return (buf_hash(hdr->b_spa, &hdr->b_dva, hdr->b_birth) %
|
return ((unsigned int)buf_hash(hdr->b_spa, &hdr->b_dva, hdr->b_birth) %
|
||||||
multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
@ -622,9 +622,10 @@ dbuf_cache_multilist_index_func(multilist_t *ml, void *obj)
|
||||||
* Also, the low order bits of the hash value are thought to be
|
* Also, the low order bits of the hash value are thought to be
|
||||||
* distributed evenly. Otherwise, in the case that the multilist
|
* distributed evenly. Otherwise, in the case that the multilist
|
||||||
* has a power of two number of sublists, each sublists' usage
|
* has a power of two number of sublists, each sublists' usage
|
||||||
* would not be evenly distributed.
|
* would not be evenly distributed. In this context full 64bit
|
||||||
|
* division would be a waste of time, so limit it to 32 bits.
|
||||||
*/
|
*/
|
||||||
return (dbuf_hash(db->db_objset, db->db.db_object,
|
return ((unsigned int)dbuf_hash(db->db_objset, db->db.db_object,
|
||||||
db->db_level, db->db_blkid) %
|
db->db_level, db->db_blkid) %
|
||||||
multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
|
@ -399,7 +399,15 @@ static unsigned int
|
||||||
dnode_multilist_index_func(multilist_t *ml, void *obj)
|
dnode_multilist_index_func(multilist_t *ml, void *obj)
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
dnode_t *dn = obj;
|
dnode_t *dn = obj;
|
||||||
return (dnode_hash(dn->dn_objset, dn->dn_object) %
|
|
||||||
|
/*
|
||||||
|
* The low order bits of the hash value are thought to be
|
||||||
|
* distributed evenly. Otherwise, in the case that the multilist
|
||||||
|
* has a power of two number of sublists, each sublists' usage
|
||||||
|
* would not be evenly distributed. In this context full 64bit
|
||||||
|
* division would be a waste of time, so limit it to 32 bits.
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
return ((unsigned int)dnode_hash(dn->dn_objset, dn->dn_object) %
|
||||||
multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
@ -1874,7 +1874,12 @@ static unsigned int
|
||||||
metaslab_idx_func(multilist_t *ml, void *arg)
|
metaslab_idx_func(multilist_t *ml, void *arg)
|
||||||
{
|
{
|
||||||
metaslab_t *msp = arg;
|
metaslab_t *msp = arg;
|
||||||
return (msp->ms_id % multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
|
||||||
|
/*
|
||||||
|
* ms_id values are allocated sequentially, so full 64bit
|
||||||
|
* division would be a waste of time, so limit it to 32 bits.
|
||||||
|
*/
|
||||||
|
return ((unsigned int)msp->ms_id % multilist_get_num_sublists(ml));
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
uint64_t
|
uint64_t
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue