From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86: use CLFLUSHOPT when available
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:27:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56BB64DA.4040409@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56BB67C602000078000D0A83@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On 10/02/16 15:39, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 10.02.16 at 16:03, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 10/02/16 12:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> Also drop an unnecessary va adjustment in the code being touched.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>>
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/flushtlb.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/flushtlb.c
>>> @@ -139,10 +139,12 @@ unsigned int flush_area_local(const void
>>> c->x86_clflush_size && c->x86_cache_size && sz &&
>>> ((sz >> 10) < c->x86_cache_size) )
>>> {
>>> - va = (const void *)((unsigned long)va & ~(sz - 1));
>>> + alternative(ASM_NOP3, "sfence", X86_FEATURE_CLFLUSHOPT);
>> Why separate? This would be better in the lower alternative(), with one
>> single nop making up the difference in length. That way, processors
>> without CLFLUSHOPT don't suffer the 1 cycle instruction decode stall
>> from the redundant rex prefix.
> Why would we want the fence inside the loop - a single fence is
> sufficient for the entire flush.
Ah yes - of course.
>
> Also if we're worried about the REX decode, this could easily be a
> NOP instead, just that I'm not certain which one in the end is less
> decode overhead.
A redundant prefix will generally have a lower overhead than a full new
instruction.
Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-10 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-10 12:40 [PATCH 0/3] x86: clflush related adjustments Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 12:56 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86: avoid flush IPI when possible Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 15:00 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-02-10 15:37 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 17:51 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-02-11 10:48 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 12:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: use CLFLUSHOPT when available Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 15:03 ` Andrew Cooper
2016-02-10 15:39 ` Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 16:27 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2016-02-10 12:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: rename X86_FEATURE_{CLFLSH -> CLFLUSH} Jan Beulich
2016-02-10 15:04 ` Andrew Cooper
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=56BB64DA.4040409@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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.