Linux RAID subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
	David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
	linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] lib/raid/xor: x86: Add AVX-512 optimized xor_gen()
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 07:56:53 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260617055653.GB19218@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260615190338.26581-1-ebiggers@kernel.org>

Can use the xor: prefix used for all other commits to lib/raid/xor?

> Benchmark on AMD Ryzen 9 9950X (Zen 5):
> 
>     src_cnt    avx          avx512       Improvement
>     =======    ==========   ==========   ===========
>     1          56353 MB/s   75388 MB/s   33%
>     2          54274 MB/s   68409 MB/s   26%
>     3          44649 MB/s   64042 MB/s   43%
>     4          41315 MB/s   55002 MB/s   33%

On my Zen 5 mobile (AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350) both the existing
AVX2 and this AVX512 code give numbers in the 200+ GB/s range.  Not
sure if is just the different benchmarking or something else going on.

FYI, one or 2 sources are basically useless as they RAID5 configs
that have no benefits over simple mirroring and thus the numbers
aren't too interesting.

> +DO_XOR_BLOCKS(avx512_inner, xor_avx512_2, xor_avx512_3, xor_avx512_4,
> +	      xor_avx512_5);

Is there really much of a benefit of doing the historic DO_XOR_BLOCKS
vs doing the loop manually?  Especially as the common cases for a
modern RAID will usually loop over more disks than this was built
for.  I.e., in practice one or two source buffers only happen at the
end of a loop over more disks.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-17  5:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-15 19:03 [PATCH v3] lib/raid/xor: x86: Add AVX-512 optimized xor_gen() Eric Biggers
2026-06-15 19:25 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-15 20:10 ` Eric Biggers
2026-06-15 21:16   ` Borislav Petkov
2026-06-15 21:29     ` Eric Biggers
2026-06-15 23:53       ` Borislav Petkov
2026-06-16  0:29         ` Dave Hansen
2026-06-17  5:44           ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-06-16  8:13   ` David Laight
2026-06-17  5:56 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-06-17 10:05   ` David Laight

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=20260617055653.GB19218@lst.de \
    --to=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox