From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Noah Goldstein' <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"torvalds@linux-foundation.org" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: RE: x86/csum: Remove unnecessary odd handling
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2023 13:49:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3883a2c481dc4facb4e732a4e46fe2a4@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230901222100.1027371-1-goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
From: Noah Goldstein
> Sent: 01 September 2023 23:21
>
> The special case for odd aligned buffers is unnecessary and mostly
> just adds overhead. Aligned buffers is the expectations, and even for
> unaligned buffer, the only case that was helped is if the buffer was
> 1-byte from word aligned which is ~1/7 of the cases. Overall it seems
> highly unlikely to be worth to extra branch.
>
> It was left in the previous perf improvement patch because I was
> erroneously comparing the exact output of `csum_partial(...)`, but
> really we only need `csum_fold(csum_partial(...))` to match so its
> safe to remove.
This is pretty much the same patch I send in Dec 2021...
Reviewed-by: David Laight <david.laight@aculab.com>
>
> All csum kunit tests pass.
>
> Signed-off-by: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c | 37 ++--------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> index cea25ca8b8cf..d06112e98893 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lib/csum-partial_64.c
> @@ -11,28 +11,6 @@
> #include <asm/checksum.h>
> #include <asm/word-at-a-time.h>
>
> -static inline unsigned short from32to16(unsigned a)
> -{
> - unsigned short b = a >> 16;
> - asm("addw %w2,%w0\n\t"
> - "adcw $0,%w0\n"
> - : "=r" (b)
> - : "0" (b), "r" (a));
> - return b;
> -}
> -
> -static inline __wsum csum_tail(u64 temp64, int odd)
> -{
> - unsigned int result;
> -
> - result = add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
> - if (unlikely(odd)) {
> - result = from32to16(result);
> - result = ((result >> 8) & 0xff) | ((result & 0xff) << 8);
> - }
> - return (__force __wsum)result;
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Do a checksum on an arbitrary memory area.
> * Returns a 32bit checksum.
> @@ -47,17 +25,6 @@ static inline __wsum csum_tail(u64 temp64, int odd)
> __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> {
> u64 temp64 = (__force u64)sum;
> - unsigned odd;
> -
> - odd = 1 & (unsigned long) buff;
> - if (unlikely(odd)) {
> - if (unlikely(len == 0))
> - return sum;
> - temp64 = ror32((__force u32)sum, 8);
> - temp64 += (*(unsigned char *)buff << 8);
> - len--;
> - buff++;
> - }
>
> /*
> * len == 40 is the hot case due to IPv6 headers, but annotating it likely()
> @@ -73,7 +40,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> "adcq $0,%[res]"
> : [res] "+r"(temp64)
> : [src] "r"(buff), "m"(*(const char(*)[40])buff));
> - return csum_tail(temp64, odd);
> + return add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
> }
> if (unlikely(len >= 64)) {
> /*
> @@ -143,7 +110,7 @@ __wsum csum_partial(const void *buff, int len, __wsum sum)
> : [res] "+r"(temp64)
> : [trail] "r"(trail));
> }
> - return csum_tail(temp64, odd);
> + return add32_with_carry(temp64 >> 32, temp64 & 0xffffffff);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(csum_partial);
>
> --
> 2.34.1
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-06 13:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230628020657.957880-1-goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
2023-06-28 9:12 ` x86/csum: Remove unnecessary odd handling Borislav Petkov
2023-06-28 15:32 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-06-28 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-06-28 18:34 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-06-28 20:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-06-29 14:04 ` David Laight
2023-06-29 14:27 ` David Laight
2023-09-01 22:21 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-06 13:49 ` David Laight [this message]
2023-09-06 14:38 ` David Laight
2023-09-20 19:20 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-20 19:23 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-23 3:24 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-23 14:05 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-23 21:13 ` David Laight
2023-09-24 14:35 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-12-23 22:18 ` Noah Goldstein
2024-01-04 23:28 ` Noah Goldstein
2024-01-04 23:34 ` Dave Hansen
2024-01-04 23:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-05 0:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-05 10:41 ` David Laight
2024-01-05 16:12 ` David Laight
2024-01-05 18:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-05 23:52 ` David Laight
2024-01-06 0:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-06 10:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-01-06 19:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-07 12:11 ` David Laight
2024-01-06 22:08 ` David Laight
2024-01-07 1:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2024-01-07 11:44 ` David Laight
2023-09-24 14:35 ` Noah Goldstein
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=3883a2c481dc4facb4e732a4e46fe2a4@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=goldstein.w.n@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@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).