lib/int_sqrt.c: optimize square root algorithm

Optimize the current version of the shift-and-subtract (hardware)
algorithm, described by John von Newmann[1] and Guy L Steele.

Iterating 1,000,000 times, perf shows for the current version:

 Performance counter stats for './sqrt-curr' (10 runs):

         27.170996 task-clock                #    0.979 CPUs utilized            ( +-  3.19% )
                 3 context-switches          #    0.103 K/sec                    ( +-  4.76% )
                 0 cpu-migrations            #    0.004 K/sec                    ( +-100.00% )
               104 page-faults               #    0.004 M/sec                    ( +-  0.16% )
        64,921,199 cycles                    #    2.389 GHz                      ( +-  0.03% )
        28,967,789 stalled-cycles-frontend   #   44.62% frontend cycles idle     ( +-  0.18% )
   <not supported> stalled-cycles-backend
       104,502,623 instructions              #    1.61  insns per cycle
                                             #    0.28  stalled cycles per insn  ( +-  0.00% )
        34,088,368 branches                  # 1254.587 M/sec                    ( +-  0.00% )
             4,901 branch-misses             #    0.01% of all branches          ( +-  1.32% )

       0.027763015 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  3.22% )

And for the new version:

Performance counter stats for './sqrt-new' (10 runs):

          0.496869 task-clock                #    0.519 CPUs utilized            ( +-  2.38% )
                 0 context-switches          #    0.000 K/sec
                 0 cpu-migrations            #    0.403 K/sec                    ( +-100.00% )
               104 page-faults               #    0.209 M/sec                    ( +-  0.15% )
           590,760 cycles                    #    1.189 GHz                      ( +-  2.35% )
           395,053 stalled-cycles-frontend   #   66.87% frontend cycles idle     ( +-  3.67% )
   <not supported> stalled-cycles-backend
           398,963 instructions              #    0.68  insns per cycle
                                             #    0.99  stalled cycles per insn  ( +-  0.39% )
            70,228 branches                  #  141.341 M/sec                    ( +-  0.36% )
             3,364 branch-misses             #    4.79% of all branches          ( +-  5.45% )

       0.000957440 seconds time elapsed                                          ( +-  2.42% )

Furthermore, this saves space in instruction text:

   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
    111       0       0     111      6f lib/int_sqrt-baseline.o
     89       0       0      89      59 lib/int_sqrt.o

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Draft_of_a_Report_on_the_EDVAC

Change-Id: I149138da0c69f25520d52d94bcbb6817aa9eb75d
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Gonzalez <jgonzlez@linets.cl>
Tested-by: Jonathan Gonzalez <jgonzlez@linets.cl>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
writeback: fix writeback cache thrashing

From: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>

Consider Process A: huge I/O on sda
        doing heavy write operation - dirty memory becomes more
        than dirty_background_ratio
        on HDD - flusher thread flush-8:0

Consider Process B: small I/O on sdb
        doing while [1]; read 1024K + rewrite 1024K + sleep 2sec
        on Flash device - flusher thread flush-8:16

As Process A is a heavy dirtier, dirty memory becomes more
than dirty_background_thresh. Due to this, below check becomes
true(checking global_page_state in over_bground_thresh)
for all bdi devices(even for very small dirtied bdi - sdb):

In this case, even small cached data on 'sdb' is forced to flush
and writeback cache thrashing happens.

When we added debug prints inside above 'if' condition and ran
above Process A(heavy dirtier on bdi with flush-8:0) and
Process B(1024K frequent read/rewrite on bdi with flush-8:16)
we got below prints:

[Test setup: ARM dual core CPU, 512 MB RAM]

[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  56064 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  56704 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 84720 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 94720 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   384 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   960 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =    64 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 92160 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   256 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   768 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =    64 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   256 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   320 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =     0 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 92032 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 91968 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   192 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  1024 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =    64 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   192 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   576 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =     0 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 84352 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   192 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =   512 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:16 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =     0 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 92608 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE = 92544 KB

As mentioned in above log, when global dirty memory > global background_thresh
small cached data is also forced to flush by flush-8:16.
If removing global background_thresh checking code, we can reduce cache
thrashing of frequently used small data.
And It will be great if we can reserve a portion of writeback cache using
min_ratio.

After applying patch:
$ echo 5 > /sys/block/sdb/bdi/min_ratio
$ cat /sys/block/sdb/bdi/min_ratio
5
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  56064 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  56704 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  84160 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  96960 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  94080 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  93120 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  93120 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  91520 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  89600 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  93696 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  93696 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  72960 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  90624 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  90624 KB
[over_bground_thresh]: wakeup flush-8:0 : BDI_RECLAIMABLE =  90688 KB

As mentioned in the above logs, once cache is reserved for Process B,
and patch is applied there is less writeback cache thrashing on sdb
by frequent forced writeback by flush-8:16 in over_bground_thresh.

After all, small cached data will be flushed by periodic writeback
once every dirty_writeback_interval.

Suggested-by: Wanpeng Li <liwanp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Vivek Trivedi <t.vivek@samsung.com>

The original code has been modified to compile on this Kernel version.

Change-Id: Ib14b6f04efbfd61e9375c2c05082f123c604bec0
cpufreq: Manage only online cpus

cpufreq core doesn't manage offline cpus and if driver->init() has returned
mask including offline cpus, it may result in unwanted behavior by cpufreq core
or governors.

We need to get only online cpus in this mask. There are two places to fix this
mask, cpufreq core and cpufreq driver. It makes sense to do this at common place
and hence is done in core.

Change-Id: I9f00d2f37d913026a07f997ce5f8a8f6df12dbc9
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>

Conflicts:
	drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c
cpufreq: Retain only online cpus in managed_policy->cpus

cpufreq's handling of cpu online event can incorrectly initialize
managed_policy->cpus to include offline cpus. This causes cpufreq
governors to include offline cpus in their idle time computation, which
causes frequency to shoot up beyond normal levels (on systems where 2 or
more cpus need to be synchronized wrt frequency change).

This frequency shootup was not seen prior to commit 21111be8 which
changed idle time accounting for offline cpus. Prior to commit 21111be8,
idle time statistics for offline cpus would include their offline time
as well. Post commit 21111be8, offline time is not included in a cpu's
idle time statistics.

As a result, ondemand (or other cpufreq) governors would see unchanged
idle time for offline cpus, causing them to interpret those (offline)
cpus as 100% busy, which is wrong.

This patch fixes the issue by modifying cpufreq's hotplug handling to
retain only online cpus in managed_policy->cpus field. cpufreq governors
would then skip such offline cpus from idle time calculations.

Change-Id: Id2eba8c0ec3367609369b2e42a4e1386ff2e7ab5
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@codeaurora.org>
cpufreq: Break out early if freq equals to target_freq

Change-Id: I45cdc6b597c1eb09025e9c00dd57f52dfe05627c
Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@semaphore.gr>