lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86: Run checksumming in parallel accross multiple alu's
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 09:32:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 07:21:24PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sébastien Dugué reported to me that devices implementing ipoib (which
> > > > don't have checksum offload hardware were spending a significant amount
> > > > of time computing checksums. We found that by splitting the checksum
> > > > computation into two separate streams, each skipping successive elements
> > > > of the buffer being summed, we could parallelize the checksum operation
> > > > accros multiple alus. Since neither chain is dependent on the result of
> > > > the other, we get a speedup in execution (on hardware that has multiple
> > > > alu's available, which is almost ubiquitous on x86), and only a
> > > > negligible decrease on hardware that has only a single alu (an extra
> > > > addition is introduced). Since addition in commutative, the result is
> > > > the same, only faster
> > >
> > > This patch should really come with measurement numbers: what performance
> > > increase (and drop) did you get on what CPUs.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Ingo
> > >
> >
> >
> > So, early testing results today. I wrote a test module that, allocated
> > a 4k buffer, initalized it with random data, and called csum_partial on
> > it 100000 times, recording the time at the start and end of that loop.
>
> It would be nice to stick that testcase into tools/perf/bench/, see how we
> are able to benchmark the kernel's mempcy and memset implementation there:
>
Sure, my module is a mess currently. But as soon as I investigate the use of
ADCX/ADOX that Anvin suggested I'll see about integrating that
Neil

> $ perf bench mem memcpy -r help
> # Running 'mem/memcpy' benchmark:
> Unknown routine:help
> Available routines...
> default ... Default memcpy() provided by glibc
> x86-64-unrolled ... unrolled memcpy() in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S
> x86-64-movsq ... movsq-based memcpy() in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S
> x86-64-movsb ... movsb-based memcpy() in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.S
>
> In a similar fashion we could build the csum_partial() code as well and do
> measurements. (We could change arch/x86/ code as well to make such
> embedding/including easier, as long as it does not change performance.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-15 15:41    [W:0.342 / U:0.120 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site