From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25237C433E7 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D0F212CC for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:47:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="lP4NOv51" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2403821AbgJPSr6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 14:47:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37970 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393020AbgJPSr6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 14:47:58 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x343.google.com (mail-ot1-x343.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::343]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A924C061755 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x343.google.com with SMTP id 32so3380237otm.3 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/6ZPAavAgIBaIj1gBG4jv7Gu9L4sN03UOtnPoYPnkGM=; b=lP4NOv51TEXmx39salQG6uTSU8gkLmkF8p4KPDm1dBqsQhZGdByHYty0AxeWaPaWU8 IMBNfFJZEqSvFcX/JetY+udEH2E82sSSdgfZuuppOCDvedBZJjGbifYxGHw+S7eNMkl7 Q4yPOvK7BXm8r1/s/BzGQMn0sLvwN7kWFqYfrHSd+w3n665ToypEQlxLHvd/d1PUW4vB lOcigsbdkdaso/ojnZ9YEwwCJDkWy14nmMFgohf3GDceQCc+WNSA+0TELgk0n2HJ8reg s0X2GbNw/6VhfYupl1ci+c1/LDuzgv37IEaqsXpF4sHnYq/fMeKyFnBOZQamOHM/6axz 243Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/6ZPAavAgIBaIj1gBG4jv7Gu9L4sN03UOtnPoYPnkGM=; b=qYFb/YVNaAoqphhTYZvI45MjZV4CkksDyAxOTZ+eNCeqnviUNemIGtGrqPYem058G+ aKdGQ8Lf0rP2R/k7Pj5yymAlF4dzfPuIj51Q2odEGBGSMXaTf6D9KZtciC3n24Pv/zxV oaYx30y6BhLnJuc+umP6D+vq46C5iTWkvzX0MLBWPo0o4CeRMv5v/ekyvXn6WhMbk2XB J729jpkexUIeMOrSuDfTv3DVaRXeOzy5UdFwMdilVgfnUgNjW3/ez4g9g/02+jVvJcJw ELqbCDm0+AlxX1KjsfftwJ9y+RlRw1UCTqNqq/ATl1NFT9z9m4Qqaf3fizUfI/22j1KG T0WQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531k6Ji9jbmiN5K4b4JOF3VrsQfWY/cfecUZ5BHtksEZRLKwP07J jPBO03zxyDfuI3OpBzgOun5l/Y/9q9QRdDAi0ysbMA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwH6XcBKPJDC1Mm7DKnG5P/EL1ztBMF0+cVOUi9cs5EKrO3sGguh+sEF+ZQIE3ke+UzdUEAW/qfG0BqWAz8nWs= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2d81:: with SMTP id g1mr3546671otb.352.1602874077645; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201003040257.62768-1-john.stultz@linaro.org> <20201008113602.n7ju2hu3j6qsaxve@DESKTOP-E1NTVVP.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20201008113602.n7ju2hu3j6qsaxve@DESKTOP-E1NTVVP.localdomain> From: John Stultz Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:44 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] dma-buf: Performance improvements for system heap & a system-uncached implementation To: Brian Starkey Cc: lkml , Sumit Semwal , Liam Mark , Laura Abbott , Hridya Valsaraju , Suren Baghdasaryan , Sandeep Patil , Daniel Mentz , Chris Goldsworthy , =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=98rjan_Eide?= , Robin Murphy , Ezequiel Garcia , Simon Ser , James Jones , linux-media , dri-devel , nd Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:36 AM Brian Starkey wrote: > > Hi John, > > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 04:02:50AM +0000, John Stultz wrote: > > Hey All, > > ... > > > > > I did add to this series a reworked version of my uncached > > system heap implementation I was submitting a few weeks back. > > Since it duplicated a lot of the now reworked system heap code, > > I realized it would be much simpler to add the functionality to > > the system_heap implementaiton itself. > > That looks like a neat approach to me. Referencing your previous > thread, I like the separate heap (as you have done), rather than a > generic "cached"/"noncached" flag on all heaps. > Sounds good! I really appreciate the feedback on this. > > While not improving the core allocation performance, the > > uncached heap allocations do result in *much* improved > > performance on HiKey960 as it avoids a lot of flushing and > > invalidating buffers that the cpu doesn't touch often. > > > > Feedback on these would be great! > > Minor nit: s/detatch/detach/ on both heaps, but other than that > you can add my r-b to patches 1-5. Doh! Thanks for the spelling catch! Thanks again! > As you've said, it does feel like there's some room for > de-duplication, but that will be easier to work out once the > implementations settle. > > I've a couple of comments for the uncached heap, but I'm not confident > I understand the implications of having the non-cached alias enough to > say if it looks OK or not. Thanks so much! -john From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3128CC433DF for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:48:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0740207BC for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:48:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="lP4NOv51" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B0740207BC Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 477F86E038; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:48:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ot1-x342.google.com (mail-ot1-x342.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::342]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5571A6E038 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:47:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ot1-x342.google.com with SMTP id t15so3383070otk.0 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/6ZPAavAgIBaIj1gBG4jv7Gu9L4sN03UOtnPoYPnkGM=; b=lP4NOv51TEXmx39salQG6uTSU8gkLmkF8p4KPDm1dBqsQhZGdByHYty0AxeWaPaWU8 IMBNfFJZEqSvFcX/JetY+udEH2E82sSSdgfZuuppOCDvedBZJjGbifYxGHw+S7eNMkl7 Q4yPOvK7BXm8r1/s/BzGQMn0sLvwN7kWFqYfrHSd+w3n665ToypEQlxLHvd/d1PUW4vB lOcigsbdkdaso/ojnZ9YEwwCJDkWy14nmMFgohf3GDceQCc+WNSA+0TELgk0n2HJ8reg s0X2GbNw/6VhfYupl1ci+c1/LDuzgv37IEaqsXpF4sHnYq/fMeKyFnBOZQamOHM/6axz 243Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/6ZPAavAgIBaIj1gBG4jv7Gu9L4sN03UOtnPoYPnkGM=; b=KR9KT6aKO8Req6VmJ4VAaVTnI5QhzgH3RsRXGqpgzDZUs10G8fOZc9o4Iv3JdmZsik EqI1+SP7cUPR/Xb6tJzhhavhM+V1H3igmCD0uaGp4ilDj0rqCK8dhN39FLl+CkpXFk+O Ctyv1xiofodGYWTvZGF4jfZFFLmaoh+AO6C8jsPOgnx/jER0MR4rcxe4QHxoBskKeZN8 wQtps7rlhEikGirSE8hGeWJY2cqIuRyiy9F8MHdhJLTQ+PiErbRdZQgR9ddRDr+ax92F FQ8hGt6zbnMQC0SLxT5UDkIu2qMtHnbTq/8waHXEPD6as03EQdf8YiZ93opYCqV7j5lM mMbA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Xt4SSqYSa9hkFILmOnN7a67SK0HYgDrT3JjndofDGT/+ufwem fYmbYzg8k2uf3z90vfhi4R1HIAUui8J565RTKh5scA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwH6XcBKPJDC1Mm7DKnG5P/EL1ztBMF0+cVOUi9cs5EKrO3sGguh+sEF+ZQIE3ke+UzdUEAW/qfG0BqWAz8nWs= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2d81:: with SMTP id g1mr3546671otb.352.1602874077645; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201003040257.62768-1-john.stultz@linaro.org> <20201008113602.n7ju2hu3j6qsaxve@DESKTOP-E1NTVVP.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20201008113602.n7ju2hu3j6qsaxve@DESKTOP-E1NTVVP.localdomain> From: John Stultz Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 11:47:44 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] dma-buf: Performance improvements for system heap & a system-uncached implementation To: Brian Starkey X-BeenThere: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Direct Rendering Infrastructure - Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: nd , Sandeep Patil , dri-devel , Ezequiel Garcia , Robin Murphy , James Jones , lkml , Liam Mark , Laura Abbott , Chris Goldsworthy , Hridya Valsaraju , =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=98rjan_Eide?= , linux-media , Suren Baghdasaryan , Daniel Mentz Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:36 AM Brian Starkey wrote: > > Hi John, > > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 04:02:50AM +0000, John Stultz wrote: > > Hey All, > > ... > > > > > I did add to this series a reworked version of my uncached > > system heap implementation I was submitting a few weeks back. > > Since it duplicated a lot of the now reworked system heap code, > > I realized it would be much simpler to add the functionality to > > the system_heap implementaiton itself. > > That looks like a neat approach to me. Referencing your previous > thread, I like the separate heap (as you have done), rather than a > generic "cached"/"noncached" flag on all heaps. > Sounds good! I really appreciate the feedback on this. > > While not improving the core allocation performance, the > > uncached heap allocations do result in *much* improved > > performance on HiKey960 as it avoids a lot of flushing and > > invalidating buffers that the cpu doesn't touch often. > > > > Feedback on these would be great! > > Minor nit: s/detatch/detach/ on both heaps, but other than that > you can add my r-b to patches 1-5. Doh! Thanks for the spelling catch! Thanks again! > As you've said, it does feel like there's some room for > de-duplication, but that will be easier to work out once the > implementations settle. > > I've a couple of comments for the uncached heap, but I'm not confident > I understand the implications of having the non-cached alias enough to > say if it looks OK or not. Thanks so much! -john _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel