linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, npiggin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/mm: Avoid calling arch_enter/leave_lazy_mmu() in set_ptes
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 22:39:44 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bkccgz9b.fsf@mail.lhotse> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZTuV5GJ52IZE7mxu@casper.infradead.org>

Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 08:06:04PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>  		ptep++;
>> -		pte = __pte(pte_val(pte) + (1UL << PTE_RPN_SHIFT));
>>  		addr += PAGE_SIZE;
>> +		/*
>> +		 * increment the pfn.
>> +		 */
>> +		pte = pfn_pte(pte_pfn(pte) + 1, pte_pgprot((pte)));
>
> when i looked at this, it generated shit code.  did you check?

I didn't look ...

<goes and looks>

It's not super clear cut. There's some difference because pfn_pte()
contains two extra VM_BUG_ONs.

But with DEBUG_VM *off* the version using pfn_pte() generates *better*
code, or at least less code, ~160 instructions vs ~200.

For some reason the version using PTE_RPN_SHIFT seems to be byte
swapping the pte an extra two times, each of which generates ~8
instructions. But I can't see why.

I tried a few other things and couldn't come up with anything that
generated better code. But I'll keep poking at it tomorrow.

cheers

  reply	other threads:[~2023-11-02 11:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-24 14:36 [PATCH v2] powerpc/mm: Avoid calling arch_enter/leave_lazy_mmu() in set_ptes Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-10-27  9:46 ` Michael Ellerman
2023-10-27 10:50 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-11-02 11:39   ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2023-11-11 10:33     ` Christophe Leroy

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=87bkccgz9b.fsf@mail.lhotse \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).