From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> To: 'Palmer Dabbelt' <palmer@dabbelt.com>, "gary@garyguo.net" <gary@garyguo.net> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, "aou@eecs.berkeley.edu" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, "nickhu@andestech.com" <nickhu@andestech.com>, "nylon7@andestech.com" <nylon7@andestech.com>, "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH] riscv: fix memmove and optimise memcpy when misalign Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 17:12:23 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <17637b10e71b41b89126cbb1b2fa61cf@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <mhng-fdda10f7-fc83-4654-a0b2-e9c86b92c37e@palmerdabbelt-glaptop> From: Palmer Dabbelt > Sent: 23 May 2021 02:47 ... > IMO the right way to go here is to just move to C-based string routines, > at least until we get to the point where we're seriously optimizing for > specific processors. We went with the C-based string rountines in glibc > as part of the upstreaming process and found only some small performance > differences when compared to the hand-written assembly, and they're way > easier to maintain. > > IIRC Linux only has trivial C string routines in lib, I think the best > way to go about that would be to higher performance versions in there. > That will allow other ports to use them. I certainly wonder how much benefit these massively unrolled loops have on modern superscaler processors - especially those with any form of 'out of order' execution. It is often easy to write assembler where all the loop control instructions happen in parallel with the memory accesses - which cannot be avoided. Loop unrolling is so 1970s. Sometimes you need to unroll once. And maybe interleave the loads and stores. But after that you can just be trashing the i-cache. David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> To: 'Palmer Dabbelt' <palmer@dabbelt.com>, "gary@garyguo.net" <gary@garyguo.net> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, "aou@eecs.berkeley.edu" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, "nickhu@andestech.com" <nickhu@andestech.com>, "nylon7@andestech.com" <nylon7@andestech.com>, "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: RE: [PATCH] riscv: fix memmove and optimise memcpy when misalign Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 17:12:23 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <17637b10e71b41b89126cbb1b2fa61cf@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <mhng-fdda10f7-fc83-4654-a0b2-e9c86b92c37e@palmerdabbelt-glaptop> From: Palmer Dabbelt > Sent: 23 May 2021 02:47 ... > IMO the right way to go here is to just move to C-based string routines, > at least until we get to the point where we're seriously optimizing for > specific processors. We went with the C-based string rountines in glibc > as part of the upstreaming process and found only some small performance > differences when compared to the hand-written assembly, and they're way > easier to maintain. > > IIRC Linux only has trivial C string routines in lib, I think the best > way to go about that would be to higher performance versions in there. > That will allow other ports to use them. I certainly wonder how much benefit these massively unrolled loops have on modern superscaler processors - especially those with any form of 'out of order' execution. It is often easy to write assembler where all the loop control instructions happen in parallel with the memory accesses - which cannot be avoided. Loop unrolling is so 1970s. Sometimes you need to unroll once. And maybe interleave the loads and stores. But after that you can just be trashing the i-cache. David - Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK Registration No: 1397386 (Wales) _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-23 17:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-02-16 22:55 [PATCH] riscv: fix memmove and optimise memcpy when misalign Gary Guo 2021-02-16 22:55 ` Gary Guo 2021-05-13 8:13 ` Bin Meng 2021-05-13 8:13 ` Bin Meng 2021-05-22 22:22 ` Gary Guo 2021-05-22 22:22 ` Gary Guo 2021-05-23 1:47 ` Palmer Dabbelt 2021-05-23 1:47 ` Palmer Dabbelt 2021-05-23 17:12 ` David Laight [this message] 2021-05-23 17:12 ` David Laight 2021-05-25 14:34 ` Gary Guo 2021-05-25 14:34 ` Gary Guo 2021-06-15 13:40 ` Bin Meng 2021-06-15 13:40 ` Bin Meng 2021-06-15 14:08 ` David Laight 2021-06-15 14:08 ` David Laight
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=17637b10e71b41b89126cbb1b2fa61cf@AcuMS.aculab.com \ --to=david.laight@aculab.com \ --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \ --cc=gary@garyguo.net \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=nickhu@andestech.com \ --cc=nylon7@andestech.com \ --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \ --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.