All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luca Barbieri <luca@luca-barbieri.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] x86-32: use SSE for atomic64_read/set if available
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:41:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ff13bc9a1002171641w372a587j39632cb856b995f1@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B7C7023.7060602@zytor.com>

> I'm a bit unhappy about this patch.  It seems to violate the assumption
> that we only ever use the FPU state guarded by
> kernel_fpu_begin()..kernel_fpu_end() and instead it uses a local hack,
> which seems like a recipe for all kinds of very subtle problems down the
> line.

kernel_fpu_begin saves the whole FPU state, but to use SSE we don't
really need that, since we can just save the %xmm registers we need,
which is much faster.
This is why SSE is used instead of just using an FPU double read.
We could however add a kernel_sse_begin_nosave/kernel_sse_end_nosave to do this.

> Unless the performance advantage is provably very compelling, I'm
> inclined to say that this is not worth it.
There is the advantage of not taking the cacheline for writing in atomic64_read.
Also locked cmpxchg8b is slow and if we were to restore the TS flag
lazily on userspace return, it would significantly improve the
function in all cases (with the current code, it depends on how fast
the architecture does clts/stts vs lock cmpxchg8b).
Of course the big-picture impact depends on the users of the interface.

Anyway, feel free to ignore this patch for now (and the next one as well).

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-18  0:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-17 11:42 [PATCH 0/10] x86-32: improve atomic64_t functions Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 01/10] x86: add support for multiple choice alternatives Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 12:47   ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-18 19:46     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 02/10] x86: add support for relative CALL and JMP in alternatives Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 19:40   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 23:38     ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 23:54       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-19 14:27   ` Masami Hiramatsu
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 03/10] x86: add support for lock prefix " Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 04/10] x86-32: allow UP/SMP lock replacement in cmpxchg64 Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 05/10] lib: add self-test for atomic64_t Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 06/10] x86-32: rewrite 32-bit atomic64 functions in assembly Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 07/10] lib: move generic atomic64 to atomic64-impl.h Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 08/10] x86-32: support atomic64_t on 386/486 UP/SMP Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 10:25   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 10:58     ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 15:20     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 09/10] x86-32: use SSE for atomic64_read/set if available Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 22:39   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18  0:41     ` Luca Barbieri [this message]
2010-02-18  0:47       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18  9:56         ` Avi Kivity
2010-02-18 10:07           ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18  8:23   ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-18  9:53     ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18  9:56       ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 10:11       ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-18 10:27         ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 15:24           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 18:14             ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 18:28               ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 18:42                 ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 19:07                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 20:26               ` Andi Kleen
2010-02-18 16:52           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 18:49             ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 19:06               ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18 19:43                 ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 19:45                 ` Yuhong Bao
2010-02-18 10:24       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 10:25   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 10:50     ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 11:00       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 12:29         ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-18 12:32           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-18 13:45             ` Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 11:42 ` [PATCH 10/10] x86-32: panic on !CX8 && XMM Luca Barbieri
2010-02-17 22:38   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-17 23:00     ` Yuhong Bao
2010-02-17 23:41       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-02-18  1:13         ` Yuhong Bao
2010-02-25 20:24           ` Yuhong Bao
2010-02-18  0:46     ` Luca Barbieri

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=ff13bc9a1002171641w372a587j39632cb856b995f1@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=luca@luca-barbieri.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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: link
Be 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.