Re: [PATCH] arm64:align function __arch_clear_user

[Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com>]

On 2021/4/14 18:41, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 05:25:43PM +0800, Kai Shen wrote:
>> Performance decreases happen in __arch_clear_user when this
>> function is not correctly aligned on HISI-HIP08 arm64 SOC which
>> fetches 32 bytes (8 instructions) from icache with a 32-bytes
>> aligned end address. As a result, if the hot loop is not 32-bytes
>> aligned, it may take more icache fetches which leads to decrease
>> in performance.
>> Dump of assembler code for function __arch_clear_user:
>>         0xffff0000809e3f10 :    nop
>>         0xffff0000809e3f14 :    mov x2, x1
>>         0xffff0000809e3f18 :    subs x1, x1, #0x8
>>         0xffff0000809e3f1c :    b.mi 0xffff0000809e3f30 <__arch_clear_user+3
>> -----  0xffff0000809e3f20 :    str    xzr, [x0],#8
>> hot    0xffff0000809e3f24 :    nop
>> loop   0xffff0000809e3f28 :    subs x1, x1, #0x8
>> -----  0xffff0000809e3f2c :    b.pl  0xffff0000809e3f20 <__arch_clear_user+1
>> The hot loop above takes one icache fetch as the code is in one
>> 32-bytes aligned area and the loop takes one more icache fetch
>> when it is not aligned like below.
>>         0xffff0000809e4178 :   str    xzr, [x0],#8
>>         0xffff0000809e417c :   nop
>>         0xffff0000809e4180 :   subs x1, x1, #0x8
>>         0xffff0000809e4184 :   b.pl  0xffff0000809e4178 <__arch_clear_user+
>> Data collected by perf:
>>                           aligned   not aligned
>>            instructions   57733790     57739065
>>         L1-dcache-store   14938070     13718242
>> L1-dcache-store-misses     349280       349869
>>         L1-icache-loads   15380895     28500665
>> As we can see, L1-icache-loads almost double when the loop is not
>> aligned.
>> This problem is found in linux 4.19 on HISI-HIP08 arm64 SOC.
>> Not sure what the case is on other arm64 SOC, but it should do
>> no harm.
>> Signed-off-by: Kai Shen <shenkai8@huawei.com>
> 
> Do you have a real world workload that's affected by this function?
> 
> I'm against adding alignments and nops for specific hardware
> implementations. What about lots of other loops that the compiler may
> generate or that we wrote in asm?
> 
 >
The benchmark we used which suffer performance decrease:
     https://github.com/redhat-performance/libMicro
     pread $OPTS -N "pread_z1k"    -s 1k    -I 300  -f /dev/zero
     pread $OPTS -N "pread_z10k"    -s 10k    -I 1000 -f /dev/zero
     pread $OPTS -N "pread_z100k"    -s 100k    -I 2000 -f /dev/zero

As far as I know, GCC has option falign-loops to align loop, as for
code written in asm, maybe we should take care of them on our own.

 From my point of view, the loop in __arch_clear_user is really hot
when being used, it is reasonable to align it.

Or maybe adding a errata CONFIG for HNS_HIP08 to fix this?

Previous message have some problems with formats of kernel mail list
So I resend this message.