public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
To: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Intel microcode loader performance improvement
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:37:10 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B955FF6.5060300@tmr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b647ffbd1003080233y5f06797fucaca3cf839e4de57@mail.gmail.com>

Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> On 5 March 2010 18:42, Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com> wrote:
>> We've noticed that on large SGI UV system configurations, running
>> microcode.ctl can take very long periods of time.  This is due to
>> the large number of vmalloc/vfree calls made by the Intel
>> generic_load_microcode() logic.
>>
>> By reusing allocated space, the following patch reduces the time
>> to run microcode.ctl on a 1024 cpu system from approximately 80
>> seconds down to 1 or 2 seconds.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
> 
> This approach seems reasonable in the scope of the current framework.
> 
> Acked-by: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
> 
> However, I think a better approach would be to have some kind of
> shared storage for loaded microcode updates. Given that for the
> majority of SMP systems all the cpus are normally updated to the very
> same new instance of microcode, it should be enough to do a search for
> the first cpu, cache the instance of microcode and then reuse it for
> others.
> 
The assumption that all CPUs are the same is not always true in practice, people 
buy a system and don't always fully populate initially, and when they add 
processors, they have a more recent stepping. So reusing microcode or updating 
in parallel would add complexity, and 2 sec for 1024 CPUs puts a pretty low 
upper bound on possible improvement. Does more improvement to a one time small 
delay justify additional complexity?

Systems that size are probably not booted all that often. Something to consider 
before putting a lot of effort into it, I think.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-03-08 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-05 17:42 [PATCH] x86: Intel microcode loader performance improvement Dimitri Sivanich
2010-03-08 10:33 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2010-03-08 11:23   ` Avi Kivity
2010-03-08 20:37   ` Bill Davidsen [this message]
2010-03-11 14:39 ` [tip:x86/microcode] x86: Improve Intel microcode loader performance tip-bot for Dimitri Sivanich

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=4B955FF6.5060300@tmr.com \
    --to=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=sivanich@sgi.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