From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Wang, Zhihong" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Optimize memcpy for AVX512 platforms Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:39:01 +0000 Message-ID: <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE0941033A63DA@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1452752002-107586-1-git-send-email-zhihong.wang@intel.com> <20160114084832.672fac86@xeon-e3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A395686 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 07:39:06 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20160114084832.672fac86@xeon-e3> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org] > Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 12:49 AM > To: Wang, Zhihong > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin ; > Richardson, Bruce ; Xie, Huawei > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Optimize memcpy for AVX512 platforms >=20 > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 01:13:18 -0500 > Zhihong Wang wrote: >=20 > > This patch set optimizes DPDK memcpy for AVX512 platforms, to make full > > utilization of hardware resources and deliver high performance. > > > > In current DPDK, memcpy holds a large proportion of execution time in > > libs like Vhost, especially for large packets, and this patch can bring > > considerable benefits. > > > > The implementation is based on the current DPDK memcpy framework, some > > background introduction can be found in these threads: > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-November/008158.html > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-January/011800.html > > > > Code changes are: > > > > 1. Read CPUID to check if AVX512 is supported by CPU > > > > 2. Predefine AVX512 macro if AVX512 is enabled by compiler > > > > 3. Implement AVX512 memcpy and choose the right implementation based > on > > predefined macros > > > > 4. Decide alignment unit for memcpy perf test based on predefined mac= ros > > > > Zhihong Wang (4): > > lib/librte_eal: Identify AVX512 CPU flag > > mk: Predefine AVX512 macro for compiler > > lib/librte_eal: Optimize memcpy for AVX512 platforms > > app/test: Adjust alignment unit for memcpy perf test > > > > app/test/test_memcpy_perf.c | 6 + > > .../common/include/arch/x86/rte_cpuflags.h | 2 + > > .../common/include/arch/x86/rte_memcpy.h | 247 > ++++++++++++++++++++- > > mk/rte.cpuflags.mk | 4 + > > 4 files changed, 255 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > >=20 > This really looks like code that could benefit from Gcc > function multiversioning. The current cpuflags model is useless/flawed > in real product deployment I've tried gcc function multi versioning, with a simple add() function which returns a + b, and a loop calling it for millions of times. Turned out this mechanism adds 17% extra time to execute, overall it's a lot of extra overhead. Quote the gcc wiki: "GCC takes care of doing the dispatching to call the right version at runtime". So it loses inlining and adds extra dispatching overhead. Also this mechanism works only for C++, right? I think using predefined macros at compile time is more efficient and suits DPDK more. Could you please give an example when the current CPU flags model stop working? So I can fix it.