lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] block layer: kmemcheck fixes
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:09:07AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
> >From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> >Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:42:56 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >>Can we please just stop doing these one-by-one assignments, and just do
> >>something like
> >>
> >> memset(rq, 0, sizeof(*rq));
> >> rq->q = q;
> >> rq->ref_count = 1;
> >> INIT_HLIST_NODE(&rq->hash);
> >> RB_CLEAR_NODE(&rq->rb_node);
> >>
> >>instead?
> >>
> >>The memset() is likely faster and smaller than one-by-one assignments
> >>anyway, even if the one-by-ones can avoid initializing some field or
> >>there ends up being a double initialization..
> >
> >The problem is store buffer compression. At least a few years
> >ago this made a huge difference in sk_buff initialization in the
> >networking.
> >
> >Maybe cpus these days have so much store bandwith that doing
> >things like the above is OK, but I doubt it :-)
>
> on modern x86 cpus the memset may even be faster if the memory isn't in
> cache;
> the "explicit" method ends up doing Write Allocate on the cache lines
> (so read them from memory) even though they then end up being written
> entirely.
> With memset the CPU is told that the entire range is set to a new value, and
> the WA can be avoided for the whole-cachelines in the range.

Don't you have write combining store buffers? Or is it still speculatively
issuing the reads even before the whole cacheline is combined?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-08 23:49    [W:0.092 / U:0.464 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site