lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Performance Improvement in CRC16 Calculations.
From
Date

Jeff,

> This patch provides a performance improvement for the CRC16
> calculations done in read/write workloads using the T10 Type 1/2/3
> guard field. For example, today with sequential write workloads (one
> thread/CPU of IO) we consume 100% of the CPU because of the CRC16
> computation bottleneck. Today's block devices are considerably
> faster, but the CRC16 calculation prevents folks from utilizing the
> throughput of such devices. To speed up this calculation and expose
> the block device throughput, we slice the old single byte for loop
> into a 16 byte for loop, with a larger CRC table to match. The result
> has shown 5x performance improvements on various big endian and little
> endian systems running the 4.18.0 kernel version.

The reason I went with a simple slice-by-one approach was that the
larger tables had a negative impact on the CPU caches. So while
slice-by-N numbers looked better in synthetic benchmarks, actual
application performance started getting affected as the tables grew
larger.

These days we obviously use the hardware-accelerated CRC calculation so
the software table approach mostly serves as a reference
implementation. But given your big vs. little endian performance
metrics, I'm assuming you guys are focused on embedded processors
without support for CRC acceleration?

I have no problem providing a choice for bigger tables. My only concern
is that the selection heuristics need to be more than one-dimensional.
Latency and cache side effects are often more important than throughput.
At least on the initiator side.

Also, I'd like to keep the original slice-by-one implementation for
reference purposes.

--
Martin K. Petersen Oracle Linux Engineering

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-11 17:37    [W:0.262 / U:0.764 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site