Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 04 Aug 2021 13:40:16 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [PATCH] riscv: use the generic string routines | From | Palmer Dabbelt <> |
| |
On Tue, 03 Aug 2021 09:54:34 PDT (-0700), mcroce@linux.microsoft.com wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 1:44 PM Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: >> >> From: Matteo Croce <mcroce@microsoft.com> >> >> Use the generic routines which handle alignment properly. >> >> These are the performances measured on a BeagleV machine for a >> 32 mbyte buffer: >> >> memcpy: >> original aligned: 75 Mb/s >> original unaligned: 75 Mb/s >> new aligned: 114 Mb/s >> new unaligned: 107 Mb/s >> >> memset: >> original aligned: 140 Mb/s >> original unaligned: 140 Mb/s >> new aligned: 241 Mb/s >> new unaligned: 241 Mb/s >> >> TCP throughput with iperf3 gives a similar improvement as well. >> >> This is the binary size increase according to bloat-o-meter: >> >> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 4/2 up/down: 432/-36 (396) >> Function old new delta >> memcpy 36 324 +288 >> memset 32 148 +116 >> strlcpy 116 132 +16 >> strscpy_pad 84 96 +12 >> strlcat 176 164 -12 >> memmove 76 52 -24 >> Total: Before=1225371, After=1225767, chg +0.03% >> >> Signed-off-by: Matteo Croce <mcroce@microsoft.com> >> Signed-off-by: Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk> >> --- > > Hi, > > can someone have a look at this change and share opinions?
This LGTM. How are the generic string routines landing? I'm happy to take this into my for-next, but IIUC we need the optimized generic versions first so we don't have a performance regression falling back to the trivial ones for a bit. Is there a shared tag I can pull in?
| |