lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: x86 memcpy performance
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 01:13:56PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Sunday 14 August 2011 11:59, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Here's the SSE memcpy version I got so far, I haven't wired in the
> > proper CPU feature detection yet because we want to run more benchmarks
> > like netperf and stuff to see whether we see any positive results there.
> >
> > The SYSTEM_RUNNING check is to take care of early boot situations where
> > we can't handle FPU exceptions but we use memcpy. There's an aligned and
> > misaligned variant which should handle any buffers and sizes although
> > I've set the SSE memcpy threshold at 512 Bytes buffersize the least to
> > cover context save/restore somewhat.
> >
> > Comments are much appreciated! :-)
> >
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h
> > @@ -28,10 +28,20 @@ static __always_inline void *__inline_memcpy(void *to, const void *from, size_t
> >
> > #define __HAVE_ARCH_MEMCPY 1
> > #ifndef CONFIG_KMEMCHECK
> > +extern void *__memcpy(void *to, const void *from, size_t len);
> > +extern void *__sse_memcpy(void *to, const void *from, size_t len);
> > #if (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 3) || __GNUC__ > 4
> > -extern void *memcpy(void *to, const void *from, size_t len);
> > +#define memcpy(dst, src, len) \
> > +({ \
> > + size_t __len = (len); \
> > + void *__ret; \
> > + if (__len >= 512) \
> > + __ret = __sse_memcpy((dst), (src), __len); \
> > + else \
> > + __ret = __memcpy((dst), (src), __len); \
> > + __ret; \
> > +})
>
> Please, no. Do not inline every memcpy invocation.
> This is pure bloat (comsidering how many memcpy calls there are)
> and it doesn't even win anything in speed, since there will be
> a fucntion call either way.
> Put the __len >= 512 check inside your memcpy instead.

In the __len < 512 case, this would actually cause two function calls,
actually: once the __sse_memcpy and then the __memcpy one.

> You may do the check if you know that __len is constant:
> if (__builtin_constant_p(__len) && __len >= 512) ...
> because in this case gcc will evaluate it at compile-time.

That could justify the bloat at least partially.

Actually, I had a version which sticks sse_memcpy code into memcpy_64.S
and that would save us both the function call and the bloat. I might
return to that one if it turns out that SSE memcpy makes sense for the
kernel.

Thanks.

--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-14 14:43    [W:0.062 / U:2.592 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site