From: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org, Jon Kohler <jon@nutanix.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
David Kaplan <david.kaplan@amd.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
Tao Zhang <tao1.zhang@intel.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 02/10] x86/bhi: Make clear_bhb_loop() effective on newer CPUs
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026 11:52:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260401185256.f2ostywtxzddnwm2@desk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260401100200.5b347628@pumpkin>
On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 10:02:00AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
> > > As well as swapping %al <-> %ah try changing the outer loop decrement to
> > > sub $0x100, %ax
> > > since %al is zero that will set the z flag the same.
> >
> > Unfortunately, using "sub $0x100, %ax"(with %al as inner loop) isn't better
> > than just using "sub $1, %ah" in the outer loop:
> >
> > Event %al inner + sub %ax Delta
> > ---------------------- ------------- ------------- ----------
> > cycles 776,775,020 813,372,036 +4.7%
> > instructions/cycle 1.23 1.17 -4.5%
> > branch-misses 4,792,502 7,610,323 +58.8%
> > uops_issued.any 768,019,010 827,465,137 +7.7%
> > time elapsed 0.1627s 0.1707s +4.9%
>
> That is even more interesting.
> The 'sub %ax' version has more uops and more branch-misses.
> Looks like the extra cost of the %ah access is less than the cost
> of the extra mis-predicted branches.
>
> Makes me wonder where a version that uses %cl fits?
> (Or use a zero-extending read and %eax/%ecx - likely to be the same.)
> I'll bet 'one beer' that is nearest the 'sub %ax' version.
%cl didn't make a noticeable difference, but ...
Event %al/%ah %al/%cl Delta
(inner/outer) (inner/outer)
---------------------- ------------- ------------- ----------
cycles 776,380,149 778,294,183 +0.2%
instructions/cycle 1.23 1.22 -0.4%
branch-misses 4,986,437 5,679,599 +13.9%
uops_issued.any 773,223,387 765,724,878 -1.0%
time elapsed 0.1631s 0.1637s +0.4%
... there are meaningful gains with 32-bit registers:
Event %al/%ah %eax/%ecx Delta
(inner/outer) (inner/outer)
---------------------- ------------- ------------- ----------
cycles 776,380,149 706,331,177 -9.0%
instructions/cycle 1.23 1.35 +9.9%
branch-misses 4,986,437 6,089,306 +22.1%
uops_issued.any 773,223,387 774,539,522 +0.2%
time elapsed 0.1631s 0.1482s -9.1%
These values are for userspace tests with immediates. Next, I will test how
they perform with memory loads in kernel. Before we finalize these uarch
nuances needs to be tested on a variety of CPUs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-01 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-24 18:16 [PATCH v8 00/10] VMSCAPE optimization for BHI variant Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:16 ` [PATCH v8 01/10] x86/bhi: x86/vmscape: Move LFENCE out of clear_bhb_loop() Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 20:22 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-03-24 21:30 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:16 ` [PATCH v8 02/10] x86/bhi: Make clear_bhb_loop() effective on newer CPUs Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 20:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-03-24 22:13 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-25 20:37 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-03-25 22:40 ` David Laight
2026-03-26 8:39 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-26 9:15 ` David Laight
2026-03-26 10:01 ` Borislav Petkov
2026-03-26 10:45 ` David Laight
2026-03-26 20:29 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-28 0:42 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-28 10:08 ` David Laight
2026-04-01 8:12 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-04-01 9:02 ` David Laight
2026-04-01 18:52 ` Pawan Gupta [this message]
2026-03-25 17:50 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-25 18:44 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-25 19:41 ` David Laight
2026-03-25 22:29 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:17 ` [PATCH v8 03/10] x86/bhi: Rename clear_bhb_loop() to clear_bhb_loop_nofence() Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:17 ` [PATCH v8 04/10] x86/vmscape: Rename x86_ibpb_exit_to_user to x86_predictor_flush_exit_to_user Pawan Gupta
2026-03-31 17:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-04-01 8:13 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:17 ` [PATCH v8 05/10] x86/vmscape: Move mitigation selection to a switch() Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:17 ` [PATCH v8 06/10] x86/vmscape: Use write_ibpb() instead of indirect_branch_prediction_barrier() Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:18 ` [PATCH v8 07/10] x86/vmscape: Use static_call() for predictor flush Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 19:09 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-24 19:51 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:18 ` [PATCH v8 08/10] x86/vmscape: Deploy BHB clearing mitigation Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 19:09 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-24 19:46 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:18 ` [PATCH v8 09/10] x86/vmscape: Resolve conflict between attack-vectors and vmscape=force Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 18:19 ` [PATCH v8 10/10] x86/vmscape: Add cmdline vmscape=on to override attack vector controls Pawan Gupta
2026-03-24 19:09 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-30 3:16 ` [PATCH v8 00/10] VMSCAPE optimization for BHI variant Jon Kohler
2026-03-30 16:11 ` Pawan Gupta
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=20260401185256.f2ostywtxzddnwm2@desk \
--to=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=david.kaplan@amd.com \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=jon@nutanix.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=tao1.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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