From: Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@arm.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: usama.anjum@arm.com, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>,
Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: clear_page[s] using memset
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 14:38:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67ab6c51-4511-46ab-931b-a4323551147a@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD++jLmMxj1C7sGz-Yt8Y+NC1CbrUTTSH4QvcZfYuJAcNoYYCQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/04/2026 8:47 am, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2026 at 3:47 PM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 07, 2026 at 11:25:55AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> Quoting my own commit message hehe:
>>>
>>>> No performance regressions can be seen, the fastpath
>>>> benchmarks differences are in the noise.
>>>
>>> This was tested on hardware with Ryan Robert's fastpath tool.
>>
>> BTW, have you tried the perf bench mmap test again with the new
>> clear_page? Both with single page and multiple pages scenarios. And
>> ideally on more than one platform.
>>
>> Will pointed out (in a private chat) that current clear_page() uses
>> non-temporal stores while memset() doesn't. It may not make any
>> difference in practice but it would be good to have some numbers.
>
> Hm interesting point, the perf bench mmap test isn't specifically
> in fastpath but since it tends to come up I guess we can add it?
>
> Ryan: is it easy to add this test to fastpath? Or easy for me to do
> myself? I looked at the instructions but they were a bit intimidating...
>
> The test is the following:
>
> We boot the kernel with cmdline like this:
> "default_hugepagesz=1G hugepagesz=1G hugepages=32" to make sure
> we have ample hugepages. This was then tested with the same
> cmdline as the original series:
>
> perf bench mem mmap -p 1GB -f demand -s 32GB -l 5
>
> The first run was discarded as the memory hierarchy is cold on
> the first run. Then I ran the above command 5 times and averaged
> the throughput
I've ran tests for with 1 warmup and 3 repeats in 4 sessions (12 times).
Results for SUT Class aws-m7g.metal:
╭─────────────┬────────────────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ Benchmark │ Result Class │ next-20260821 without this patch (base) │ next-20260821 with this patch │
├─────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ perf/mem │ memset -k 1GB -f default -s 16GB (bytes/sec) │ 63932542232.12 │ 1.92% │
│ │ mmap -p 1GB -f demand -s 32GB -l 5 (bytes/sec) │ 63272579168.03 │ -0.57% │
│ │ mmap -p 4KB -f demand -s 32GB -l 5 (bytes/sec) │ 49692830849.48 │ -1.11% │
╰─────────────┴────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────────────────╯
Results for SUT Class cesw-aarch64-ampereone-1s-a192-32x:
╭─────────────┬────────────────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────────────────────┬───────────────────────────────────────────╮
│ Benchmark │ Result Class │ next-20260821 without this patch (base) │ next-20260821 with this patch │
├─────────────┼────────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ perf/mem │ memset -k 1GB -f default -s 16GB (bytes/sec) │ 33895562998.71 │ 0.25% │
│ │ mmap -p 1GB -f demand -s 32GB -l 5 (bytes/sec) │ 34338454210.17 │ 1.16% │
│ │ mmap -p 4KB -f demand -s 32GB -l 5 (bytes/sec) │ 25687107580.90 │ -0.85% │
╰─────────────┴────────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────────────────────┴───────────────────────────────────────────╯
>
> The x86 commit cb431accb36e51b64ce34b5cc4d5ed292895fd84
> also mentions this test:
>
> perf bench mem memset -k 1GB -f default -s 16GB
>
> I tried it on QEMU, no real benefits with either the previous or this
> patch, and no regressions either. (x86 passes -f x86-64-stosq
> which are some optimized memset instructions)
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
>
Thanks,
Usama
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-24 13:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-06 8:57 [PATCH] arm64: clear_page[s] using memset Linus Walleij
2026-04-02 20:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-04-07 9:25 ` Linus Walleij
2026-04-07 9:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-04-07 13:47 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-04-08 7:47 ` Linus Walleij
2026-08-24 13:38 ` Usama Anjum [this message]
2026-08-26 11:50 ` Linus Walleij
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=67ab6c51-4511-46ab-931b-a4323551147a@arm.com \
--to=usama.anjum@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linusw@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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