From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] ARM: dma-mapping: use asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:27:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20110715092717.GO23270@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1308556213-24970-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <201106241736.43576.arnd@arndb.de> <000601cc34c4$430f91f0$c92eb5d0$%szyprowski@samsung.com> <201106271519.43581.arnd@arndb.de> <20110707120918.GF7810@wantstofly.org> <20110707123825.GO8286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110715001021.GM951@wantstofly.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110715001021.GM951@wantstofly.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Lennert Buytenhek Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Marek Szyprowski , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, 'Kyungmin Park' , 'Joerg Roedel' List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 02:10:21AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 01:38:25PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > > > I suppose for the majority of the cases, the overhead of the indirect > > > > > > function call is near-zero, compared to the overhead of the cache > > > > > > management operation, so it would only make a difference for coherent > > > > > > systems without an IOMMU. Do we care about micro-optimizing those? > > > > > > FWIW, when I was hacking on ARM access point routing performance some > > > time ago, turning the L1/L2 cache maintenance operations into inline > > > functions (inlined into the ethernet driver) gave me a significant and > > > measurable performance boost. > > > > On what architecture? Can you show what you did to gain that? > > Patch is attached below. It's an ugly product-specific hack, not > suitable for upstreaming in this form, etc etc, but IIRC it gave me > a ~5% improvement on packet routing. Do you know how much is contributed from each change - L1, L2, moving dma_cache_maint() inline, removing the virt_addr_valid() etc? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:51240 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965364Ab1GOJ1v (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2011 05:27:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:27:17 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] ARM: dma-mapping: use asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h Message-ID: <20110715092717.GO23270@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1308556213-24970-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <201106241736.43576.arnd@arndb.de> <000601cc34c4$430f91f0$c92eb5d0$%szyprowski@samsung.com> <201106271519.43581.arnd@arndb.de> <20110707120918.GF7810@wantstofly.org> <20110707123825.GO8286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110715001021.GM951@wantstofly.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110715001021.GM951@wantstofly.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Lennert Buytenhek Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Marek Szyprowski , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, 'Kyungmin Park' , 'Joerg Roedel' Message-ID: <20110715092717.XrtZqnnXsQUiFJwr92sYvP8LagYFCjcU3fFv48uUnkw@z> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 02:10:21AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 01:38:25PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > > > I suppose for the majority of the cases, the overhead of the indirect > > > > > > function call is near-zero, compared to the overhead of the cache > > > > > > management operation, so it would only make a difference for coherent > > > > > > systems without an IOMMU. Do we care about micro-optimizing those? > > > > > > FWIW, when I was hacking on ARM access point routing performance some > > > time ago, turning the L1/L2 cache maintenance operations into inline > > > functions (inlined into the ethernet driver) gave me a significant and > > > measurable performance boost. > > > > On what architecture? Can you show what you did to gain that? > > Patch is attached below. It's an ugly product-specific hack, not > suitable for upstreaming in this form, etc etc, but IIRC it gave me > a ~5% improvement on packet routing. Do you know how much is contributed from each change - L1, L2, moving dma_cache_maint() inline, removing the virt_addr_valid() etc? From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 10:27:17 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/8] ARM: dma-mapping: use asm-generic/dma-mapping-common.h In-Reply-To: <20110715001021.GM951@wantstofly.org> References: <1308556213-24970-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <201106241736.43576.arnd@arndb.de> <000601cc34c4$430f91f0$c92eb5d0$%szyprowski@samsung.com> <201106271519.43581.arnd@arndb.de> <20110707120918.GF7810@wantstofly.org> <20110707123825.GO8286@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110715001021.GM951@wantstofly.org> Message-ID: <20110715092717.GO23270@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 02:10:21AM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2011 at 01:38:25PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > > > > I suppose for the majority of the cases, the overhead of the indirect > > > > > > function call is near-zero, compared to the overhead of the cache > > > > > > management operation, so it would only make a difference for coherent > > > > > > systems without an IOMMU. Do we care about micro-optimizing those? > > > > > > FWIW, when I was hacking on ARM access point routing performance some > > > time ago, turning the L1/L2 cache maintenance operations into inline > > > functions (inlined into the ethernet driver) gave me a significant and > > > measurable performance boost. > > > > On what architecture? Can you show what you did to gain that? > > Patch is attached below. It's an ugly product-specific hack, not > suitable for upstreaming in this form, etc etc, but IIRC it gave me > a ~5% improvement on packet routing. Do you know how much is contributed from each change - L1, L2, moving dma_cache_maint() inline, removing the virt_addr_valid() etc?