All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: konrad.wilk@oracle.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
	hpa@zytor.com, rob@landley.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	joerg.roedel@amd.com, bhelgaas@google.com, shuahkhan@gmail.com,
	fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Improve swiotlb performance by using physical addresses
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 09:05:10 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50783FB6.3070205@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121011203010.12444.15503.stgit@gitlad.jf.intel.com>

On 10/11/2012 01:34 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> While working on 10Gb/s routing performance I found a significant amount of
> time was being spent in the swiotlb DMA handler. Further digging found that a
> significant amount of this was due to virtual to physical address translation
> and calling the function that did it. It accounted for nearly 60% of the
> total swiotlb overhead.
>
> This patch set works to resolve that by replacing the io_tlb_start and
> io_tlb_end virtual addresses with a physical addresses. In addition it changes
> the io_tlb_overflow_buffer from a virtual to a physical address. I followed
> through with the cleanup to the point that the only functions that really
> require the virtual address for the DMA buffer are the init, free, and
> bounce functions.
>
> In the case of devices that are using the bounce buffers these patches should
> result in only a slight performance gain if any. This is due to the locking
> overhead required to map and unmap the buffers.
>
> In the case of devices that are not making use of bounce buffers these patches
> can significantly reduce their overhead. In the case of an ixgbe routing test
> for example, these changes result in 7 fewer calls to __phys_addr and
> allow is_swiotlb_buffer to become inlined due to a reduction in the number of
> instructions. When running a routing throughput test using small packets I
> saw roughly a 6% increase in packets rates after applying these patches. This
> appears to match up with the CPU overhead reduction I was tracking via perf.
>
> Before:
> Results 10.0Mpps
>
> After:
> Results 10.6Mpps
>
> Finally, I updated the parameter names for several of the core function calls
> as there was some ambiguity in naming. Specifically virtual address pointers
> were named dma_addr. When I changed these pointers to physical I instead used
> the name tlb_addr as this value represented a physical address in the
> io_tlb_start region and is less likely to be confused with a bus address.
>
> v2:
> I reviewed the changes and realized that the first patch that was dropping
> io_tlb_end and calculating the value didn't actually gain me much once I had
> gone through and translated the rest of the addresses to physical addresses.
> As such I have updated the patch so that it instead is converting io_tlb_end
> from a virtual address to a physical address.  This actually helps to reduce
> the overhead for is_swiotlb_buffer and swiotlb_dma_supported by several
> instructions.

The first three patches were replacing "static char *" with
"phys_addr_t" when I should have been using "static phys_addr_t".  As
such I will submit an updated v3 version on Monday.

Thanks,

Alex

      parent reply	other threads:[~2012-10-12 16:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-11 20:34 [PATCH v2 0/7] Improve swiotlb performance by using physical addresses Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] swiotlb: Make io_tlb_end a physical address instead of a virtual one Alexander Duyck
2012-10-13 12:52   ` Hillf Danton
2012-10-15 15:43     ` Alexander Duyck
2012-10-18 12:41       ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-10-18 15:53         ` Alexander Duyck
2012-10-19 14:18           ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-10-19 16:21             ` Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] swiotlb: Make io_tlb_start " Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] swiotlb: Make io_tlb_overflow_buffer a physical address Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] swiotlb: Return physical addresses when calling swiotlb_tbl_map_single Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] swiotlb: Use physical addresses for swiotlb_tbl_unmap_single Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] swiotlb: Use physical addresses instead of virtual in swiotlb_tbl_sync_single Alexander Duyck
2012-10-11 20:34 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] swiotlb: Do not export swiotlb_bounce since there are no external consumers Alexander Duyck
2012-10-12 16:05 ` Alexander Duyck [this message]

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=50783FB6.3070205@intel.com \
    --to=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=joerg.roedel@amd.com \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rob@landley.net \
    --cc=shuahkhan@gmail.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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.