Messages in this thread | | | From | John Garry <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 0/7] Add non-strict mode support for iommu-dma | Date | Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:35:20 +0100 |
| |
On 21/09/2018 12:03, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 21/09/18 10:29, Robin Murphy wrote: >> Hi John, >> >> On 2018-09-21 10:20 AM, John Garry wrote: >>> On 20/09/2018 17:10, Robin Murphy wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Hopefully this is the last spin of the series - I've now dropped my >>>> light >>>> touch and fixed up all the various prose text, plus implemented the >>>> proper >>>> quirk support for short-descriptor because it's actually just a trivial >>>> cut-and-paste job. >>>> >>>> Robin. >>>> >>> >>> Hi Robin, >>> >>> JFYI, I'm trying to test this patchset to get some figures and >>> provide a tested-by tag, but 4/8 seems to rely on >>> "iommu/io-pgtable-arm: Fix race handling in split_blk_unmap()" - more >>> specifically, it seems to rely on the version which Will rewrote in >>> your patch review, and I am not sure on what branch it exists on, if >>> any. >> >> Sorry, I should have said this is based on Will's iommu/devel branch: >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/will/linux.git/log/?h=iommu/devel > > > FWIW I've now pushed out a complete branch here: > > git://linux-arm.org/linux-rm iommu/non-strict >
Cheers
So for my network test scenario I was getting a boost @ 250K vs 160K packet(s)/second with strict off/on
For NVMe single disk performance, I was getting a boost @ 582K vs 370K IOPS with strict off/on.
I wasn't seeing such a boost for other storage controller scenario (that's with 6 SSDs), with 776K vs 740K IOPS for strict off/on, but SMMU off was ~800K IOPS.
FWIW: Tested-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Thanks, John
> > Robin. > > . >
| |