All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] raid6: simplify CPU feature checks
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:47:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261026184714.GB1876@quark> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261026145704.5601466f@pumpkin>

On Mon, Oct 26, 2026 at 02:57:04PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2026 12:12:07 -0700
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Remove unnecessary checks for features that are prerequisites for other
> > features, such as AVX which is a prerequisite for AVX2.
> > 
> > (Note: in most cases arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c warns about
> > missing prerequisites rather than enforcing them.  This is intentional,
> > and it does not mean the prerequisites should be checked elsewhere.)
> > 
> > Then, move the raid6_recov_algo_add() lines into the appropriate places
> > just above so that the same CPU features aren't checked multiple times.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  lib/raid/raid6/x86/pq_arch.h | 51 ++++++++----------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/lib/raid/raid6/x86/pq_arch.h b/lib/raid/raid6/x86/pq_arch.h
> > index 4a863b253b909..418e4d4a2930f 100644
> > --- a/lib/raid/raid6/x86/pq_arch.h
> > +++ b/lib/raid/raid6/x86/pq_arch.h
> > @@ -16,63 +16,34 @@ extern const struct raid6_recov_calls raid6_recov_ssse3;
> >  extern const struct raid6_recov_calls raid6_recov_avx2;
> >  extern const struct raid6_recov_calls raid6_recov_avx512;
> >  
> > ...
> >  static __always_inline void __init arch_raid6_init(void)
> >  {
> > -	if (raid6_has_avx2()) {
> > +	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AVX2)) {
> >  		raid6_algo_add(&raid6_avx2x1);
> >  		raid6_algo_add(&raid6_avx2x2);
> >  		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64))
> >  			raid6_algo_add(&raid6_avx2x4);
> > -		if (raid6_has_avx512()) {
> > +		if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AVX512BW) &&
> > +		    boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AVX512VL) &&
> > +		    boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_AVX512DQ)) {
> >  			raid6_algo_add(&raid6_avx512x1);
> >  			raid6_algo_add(&raid6_avx512x2);
> >  			if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64))
> >  				raid6_algo_add(&raid6_avx512x4);
> > +			raid6_recov_algo_add(&raid6_recov_avx512);
> > +		} else {
> > +			raid6_recov_algo_add(&raid6_recov_avx2);
> 
> Is that right (you haven't changed it)?
> You get both the avx2 and axv512 normal algorithms, but only one
> of the recov ones.
> 
> I presume these are added in addition to the generic C code and
> some startup test decides which is fastest and so used?

Yes, it's unchanged from before.

The raid6 library implements runtime benchmark-based selection for
struct raid6_algo, but not for struct raid6_recov_algo where only one
can be registered.  As always, you're welcome to check the code rather
than speculate; see lib/raid/raid6/algos.c.

Yes, it's inconsistent.  However, changing that is outside the scope of
this series.  (FWIW, none of the crypto or CRC code uses runtime
benchmark-based selection.  I think it's not worth it.)

- Eric

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-26 18:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-25 19:12 [PATCH 0/3] raid: remove obsolete MMX optimized code Eric Biggers
2026-10-25 19:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] xor: " Eric Biggers
2026-10-25 19:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] raid6: " Eric Biggers
2026-10-25 19:12 ` [PATCH 3/3] raid6: simplify CPU feature checks Eric Biggers
2026-10-26 14:57   ` David Laight
2026-10-26 18:47     ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2026-10-26 15:00 ` [PATCH 0/3] raid: remove obsolete MMX optimized code David Laight
2026-10-27 15:07 ` Christoph Hellwig

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20261026184714.GB1876@quark \
    --to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.