From: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: save memory access in check_and_switch_context() fast switch path
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 09:50:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFgQCTtu9U2bB9JfXMw5TLd=tcrXkexVZOSgP=CDHnfQamddbQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFgQCTtnLzZuJ7D4XBkSdD9ba1f5g_2GHo_WPYx+FpJx9XepKA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 4:10 PM Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 6:13 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 01:44:39PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > > The cpu_number and __per_cpu_offset cost two different cache lines, and may
> > > not exist after a heavy user space load.
> > >
> > > By replacing per_cpu(active_asids, cpu) with this_cpu_ptr(&active_asids) in
> > > fast path, register is used and these memory access are avoided.
> >
> > How about:
> >
> > | On arm64, smp_processor_id() reads a per-cpu `cpu_number` variable,
> > | using the per-cpu offset stored in the tpidr_el1 system register. In
> > | some cases we generate a per-cpu address with a sequence like:
> > |
> > | | cpu_ptr = &per_cpu(ptr, smp_processor_id());
> > |
> > | Which potentially incurs a cache miss for both `cpu_number` and the
> > | in-memory `__per_cpu_offset` array. This can be written more optimally
> > | as:
> > |
> > | | cpu_ptr = this_cpu_ptr(ptr);
> > |
> > | ... which only needs the offset from tpidr_el1, and does not need to
> > | load from memory.
> Appreciate for your clear document.
> >
> > > By replacing per_cpu(active_asids, cpu) with this_cpu_ptr(&active_asids) in
> > > fast path, register is used and these memory access are avoided.
> >
> > Do you have any numbers that show benefit here? It's not clear to me how
> > often the above case would apply where the cahes would also be hot for
> > everything else we need, and numbers would help to justify that.
> Initially, I was just abstracted by the macro __my_cpu_offset
> implement, and came to this question. But following your thinking, I
> realized data is needed to make things clear.
>
> I have finished a test with 5.8.0-rc4 kernel on a 46 cpus qualcomm machine.
> command: time -p make all -j138
>
> Before this patch:
> real 291.86
> user 11050.18
> sys 362.91
>
> After this patch
> real 291.11
> user 11055.62
> sys 363.39
>
> As the data, it shows a very small improvement.
The data may be affected by random factors, and less persuasive. And I
tried to do some repeated tests with perf-stat.
#cat b.sh
make clean && make all -j138
#perf stat --repeat 10 --null --sync sh b.sh
- before this patch
Performance counter stats for 'sh b.sh' (10 runs):
298.62 +- 1.86 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.62% )
- after this patch
Performance counter stats for 'sh b.sh' (10 runs):
297.734 +- 0.954 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.32% )
As the mean value 298.62 VS 297.734 shows, this trivial change does
bring a small improvement in performance.
>
> Thanks,
> Pingfan
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-07 1:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-03 5:44 [PATCH] arm64/mm: save memory access in check_and_switch_context() fast switch path Pingfan Liu
2020-07-03 10:13 ` Mark Rutland
2020-07-06 8:10 ` Pingfan Liu
2020-07-07 1:50 ` Pingfan Liu [this message]
2020-07-09 11:48 ` Mark Rutland
2020-07-10 8:03 ` Pingfan Liu
2020-07-10 9:35 ` Mark Rutland
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='CAFgQCTtu9U2bB9JfXMw5TLd=tcrXkexVZOSgP=CDHnfQamddbQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=kernelfans@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
--cc=vladimir.murzin@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).