From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Demian Shulhan <demyansh@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yu Kuai <yukuai@fnnas.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
broonie@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com, Li Nan <linan122@huawei.com>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] raid6: arm64: add SVE optimized implementation for syndrome generation
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 07:30:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260330053003.GA4736@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOLeWCsxhzdxQviizJ4X4VOp_28LCtO-RjWoCcZG29rQw86NVg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Mar 29, 2026 at 04:01:06PM +0300, Demian Shulhan wrote:
> Furthermore, as Christoph suggested, I tested scalability on wider
> arrays since the default kernel benchmark is hardcoded to 8 disks,
> which doesn't give the unrolled SVE loop enough data to shine. On a
> 16-disk array, svex4 hits 15.1 GB/s compared to 8.0 GB/s for neonx4.
> On a 24-disk array, while neonx4 chokes and drops to 7.8 GB/s, svex4
> maintains a stable 15.0 GB/s — effectively doubling the throughput.I
> agree this patch should be put on hold for now. My intention is to
> leave these numbers here as evidence that implementing SVE context
> preservation in the kernel (the "good use case") is highly justifiable
> from both a power-efficiency and a wide-array throughput perspective
> for modern ARM64 hardware.
>
> Thanks again for your time and time and review!
To me this sounds like an interesting case for a SVE kernel API.
But I'm not relly knowledgeable enough to provide one to help
with testing this further.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-30 5:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-18 15:02 [PATCH v2] raid6: arm64: add SVE optimized implementation for syndrome generation Demian Shulhan
2026-03-24 7:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-24 8:00 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2026-03-24 10:04 ` Mark Rutland
2026-03-29 13:01 ` Demian Shulhan
2026-03-30 5:30 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-03-18 15:01 Demian Shulhan
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=20260330053003.GA4736@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=demyansh@gmail.com \
--cc=linan122@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yukuai@fnnas.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