From: Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
Petitboot@lists.ozlabs.org, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: Add --lite option
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:37:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151207140755.GG16406@dhcppc13.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56658696.6070103@arm.com>
Hi James,
Thanks for the reply.
On 07/12/2015:01:16:06 PM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Pratyush,
>
> On 07/12/15 11:48, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> >> 1) When we execute kexec() system call in first kernel, at that time it
> >> calculates sha256 on all the binaries [1]. It take almost un-noticeable time
> >> (less than a sec) there.
> >>
> >> 2) When purgatory is executed then it re-calculates sha256 using same routines
> >> [2] on same binary data as that of case (1). But, now it takes 10-20 sec
> >> (depending of size of binaries)?
> >>
> >> Why did not it take same time with O2 + D-cache enabled? I think, we should be
> >> able to achieve same time in second case as well. What is missing?
>
> I haven't benchmarked this, but:
>
> util_lib/sha256.c contains calls out to memcpy().
> In your case 1, this will use the glibc version. In case 2, it will use
> the version implemented in purgatory/string.c, which is a byte-by-byte copy.
>
Yes, I agree that byte copy is too slow. But, memcpy() in sha256_update() will
copy only few bytes (I think max 126 bytes). Most of the data will be processed
using loop while( length >= 64 ){}, where we do not have any memcpy.So, I do not
think that this would be causing such a difference.
Could it be the case that I am not using perfect memory attributes while setting
up identity mapping and enabling D-cache. My implementation is here:
https://github.com/pratyushanand/kexec-tools/commit/8efdbc56b52f99a8a074edd0ddc519d7b68be82f
~Pratyush
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-07 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-21 23:12 [PATCH] kexec: Add --lite option Geoff Levand
2015-10-22 0:02 ` Jeremy Kerr
2015-10-22 0:37 ` Geoff Levand
2015-11-05 6:20 ` Scott Wood
2015-10-22 3:17 ` Dave Young
2015-10-22 12:50 ` Vivek Goyal
2015-10-22 19:08 ` Geoff Levand
2015-11-05 5:56 ` Scott Wood
2015-12-07 11:45 ` Pratyush Anand
2015-12-07 11:48 ` Pratyush Anand
2015-12-07 13:16 ` James Morse
2015-12-07 14:07 ` Pratyush Anand [this message]
2015-12-08 1:03 ` Scott Wood
2015-12-08 16:00 ` James Morse
2015-12-09 9:28 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-01-11 12:46 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-01-12 1:06 ` Simon Horman
2015-10-22 18:57 ` Geoff Levand
2015-10-22 19:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2015-10-23 9:46 ` Dave Young
2015-10-23 18:49 ` Geoff Levand
2015-10-23 19:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-04-11 18:30 ` [PATCH v2] kexec: Add --no-checks option Geoff Levand
2018-04-19 8:38 ` Simon Horman
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=20151207140755.GG16406@dhcppc13.redhat.com \
--to=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=Petitboot@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=geoff@infradead.org \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox