[PATCH v2] x86: introduce memcpy_flushcache_single

[Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>]

On Fri, 17 Apr 2020, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> writes:
> 
> > The goal of naming it _inatomic() was specifically for the observation
> > that your driver coordinates atomic access and does not benefit from
> > the cache friendliness that non-temporal stores afford. That said
> > _inatomic() is arguably not a good choice either because that refers
> > to whether the copy is prepared to take a fault or not. What about
> > _exclusive() or _single()? Anything but _clflushopt() that conveys no
> > contextual information.

OK. I renamed it to memcpy_flushcache_single

> > Other than quibbling with the name, and one more comment below, this
> > looks ok to me.
> >
> >> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
> >> ===================================================================
> >> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c   2020-04-17 14:06:35.139999000 +0200
> >> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c        2020-04-17 14:06:35.129999000 +0200
> >> @@ -1166,7 +1166,10 @@ static void bio_copy_block(struct dm_wri
> >>                         }
> >>                 } else {
> >>                         flush_dcache_page(bio_page(bio));
> >> -                       memcpy_flushcache(data, buf, size);
> >> +                       if (likely(size > 512))
> >
> > This needs some reference to how this magic number is chosen and how a
> > future developer might determine whether the value needs to be
> > adjusted.
> 
> I don't think it's a good idea to make this decision in generic code as
> architectures or even CPU models might have different constraints on the
> size.
> 
> So I'd rather let the architecture implementation decide and make this
> 
>                          flush_dcache_page(bio_page(bio));
>  -                       memcpy_flushcache(data, buf, size);
>  +                       memcpy_flushcache_bikesheddedname(data, buf, size);
> 
> and have the default fallback memcpy_flushcache() and let the
> architecture sort the size limit and the underlying technology out.
> 
> So x86 can use clflushopt or implement it with movdir64b and any other
> architecture can provide their own magic soup without changing the
> callsite.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx

OK - so I moved the decision to memcpy_flushcache_single and I added a 
comment that explains the magic number.

Mikulas




From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>

Implement the function memcpy_flushcache_single which flushes cache just
like memcpy_flushcache - except that it uses cached writes and explicit
cache flushing instead of non-temporal stores.

Explicit cache flushing performs better in singlethreaded cases (i.e. the
dm-writecache target with block size greater than 512), non-temporal
stores perform better in other cases (mostly multithreaded workloads) - so
we provide these two functions and the user should select which one is
faster for his particular workload.

dm-writecache througput (on real Optane-based persistent memory):
block size	512		1024		2048		4096
movnti		496 MB/s	642 MB/s	725 MB/s	744 MB/s
clflushopt	373 MB/s	688 MB/s	1.1 GB/s	1.2 GB/s

Signed-off-by: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com>

---
 arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h |   10 ++++++++
 arch/x86/lib/usercopy_64.c       |   46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/md/dm-writecache.c       |    2 -
 include/linux/string.h           |    6 +++++
 4 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h	2020-04-20 15:31:46.939999000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h	2020-04-20 15:31:46.929999000 +0200
@@ -114,6 +114,14 @@ memcpy_mcsafe(void *dst, const void *src
 	return 0;
 }
 
+/*
+ * In some cases (mostly single-threaded workload), clflushopt is faster
+ * than non-temporal stores. In other situations, non-temporal stores are
+ * faster. So, we provide two functions:
+ *	memcpy_flushcache using non-temporal stores
+ *	memcpy_flushcache_single using clflushopt
+ * The caller should test which one is faster for the particular workload.
+ */
 #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_UACCESS_FLUSHCACHE
 #define __HAVE_ARCH_MEMCPY_FLUSHCACHE 1
 void __memcpy_flushcache(void *dst, const void *src, size_t cnt);
@@ -135,6 +143,8 @@ static __always_inline void memcpy_flush
 	}
 	__memcpy_flushcache(dst, src, cnt);
 }
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_MEMCPY_FLUSHCACHE_CLFLUSHOPT 1
+void memcpy_flushcache_single(void *dst, const void *src, size_t cnt);
 #endif
 
 #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/string.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/string.h	2020-04-20 15:31:46.939999000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/include/linux/string.h	2020-04-20 15:31:46.929999000 +0200
@@ -175,6 +175,12 @@ static inline void memcpy_flushcache(voi
 	memcpy(dst, src, cnt);
 }
 #endif
+#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_MEMCPY_FLUSHCACHE_CLFLUSHOPT
+static inline void memcpy_flushcache_single(void *dst, const void *src, size_t cnt)
+{
+	memcpy_flushcache(dst, src, cnt);
+}
+#endif
 void *memchr_inv(const void *s, int c, size_t n);
 char *strreplace(char *s, char old, char new);
 
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/lib/usercopy_64.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/lib/usercopy_64.c	2020-04-20 15:31:46.939999000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/lib/usercopy_64.c	2020-04-20 15:38:13.159999000 +0200
@@ -199,6 +199,52 @@ void __memcpy_flushcache(void *_dst, con
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__memcpy_flushcache);
 
+void memcpy_flushcache_single(void *_dst, const void *_src, size_t size)
+{
+	unsigned long dest = (unsigned long) _dst;
+	unsigned long source = (unsigned long) _src;
+
+	/*
+	 * dm-writecache througput (on real Optane-based persistent memory):
+	 * measured with dd:
+	 *
+	 * block size	512		1024		2048		4096
+	 * movnti	496 MB/s	642 MB/s	725 MB/s	744 MB/s
+	 * clflushopt	373 MB/s	688 MB/s	1.1 GB/s	1.2 GB/s
+	 *
+	 * We see that movnti performs better for 512-byte blocks, and
+	 * clflushopt performs better for 1024-byte and larger blocks. So, we
+	 * prefer clflushopt for sizes >= 768.
+	 */
+
+	if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSHOPT) && likely(boot_cpu_data.x86_clflush_size == 64) &&
+	    likely(size >= 768)) {
+		if (unlikely(!IS_ALIGNED(dest, 64))) {
+			size_t len = min_t(size_t, size, ALIGN(dest, 64) - dest);
+
+			memcpy((void *) dest, (void *) source, len);
+			clflushopt((void *)dest);
+			dest += len;
+			source += len;
+			size -= len;
+		}
+		do {
+			memcpy((void *)dest, (void *)source, 64);
+			clflushopt((void *)dest);
+			dest += 64;
+			source += 64;
+			size -= 64;
+		} while (size >= 64) 
+		if (unlikely(size != 0)) {
+			memcpy((void *)dest, (void *)source, size);
+			clflushopt((void *)dest);
+		}
+		return;
+	}
+	memcpy_flushcache((void *)dest, (void *)source, size);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(memcpy_flushcache_single);
+
 void memcpy_page_flushcache(char *to, struct page *page, size_t offset,
 		size_t len)
 {
Index: linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c	2020-04-20 15:31:46.939999000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/drivers/md/dm-writecache.c	2020-04-20 15:32:35.549999000 +0200
@@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ static void bio_copy_block(struct dm_wri
 			}
 		} else {
 			flush_dcache_page(bio_page(bio));
-			memcpy_flushcache(data, buf, size);
+			memcpy_flushcache_single(data, buf, size);
 		}
 
 		bvec_kunmap_irq(buf, &flags);