From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Luke Starrett <luke.starrett@broadcom.com>,
will.deacon@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Implement optimised IP checksum helpers
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 18:08:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5734B899.3040207@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a3d91ddf-565d-5cef-0a56-39154e3a00d2@broadcom.com>
Hi Luke,
On 12/05/16 16:34, Luke Starrett wrote:
> Hi Robin,
>
> I pulled this in to a userspace test app expecting that the __uint128_t
> type might cause GCC to emit 'ldp'. Seems like that was that your
> intent based on your commit note. Instead I see two 64b loads (ldr Xn),
> and a single 32b load (ldr Wn) for the trailing 4B. This was with
> Linaro GCC 4.9-2015.06.
GCC 5 happily emits ldp there, but indeed I couldn't figure out how to
convince GCC 4 to do so. From a quick ferret around in the GCC Git, it
looks like the relevant optimisations may have only gone in post-4.9.
> Otherwise, the C cycle count looks good enough compared to the asm version.
Yeah, compiling as standalone functions with GCC 5 I get 19 instructions
vs. 17 for the asm, but the loop logic gets optimised out completely
when ihl is a compile-time constant (e.g. inet_gro_receive())
Cheers,
Robin.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Luke
>
>
> On 5/12/2016 10:26 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> AArch64 is capable of 128-bit memory accesses without alignment
>> restrictions, which makes it both possible and highly practical to slurp
>> up a typical 20-byte IP header in just 2 loads. Implement our own
>> version of ip_fast_checksum() to take advantage of that, resulting in
>> considerably fewer instructions and memory accesses than the generic
>> version. We can also get more optimal code generation for csum_fold() by
>> defining it a slightly different way round from the generic version, so
>> throw that into the mix too.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Luke Starrett <luke.starrett@broadcom.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Having spent an evening poring over disassembler output, it turns out
>> that there's really no need to drop into asm for this, hurrah! I've
>> taken it for a spin on both big and little-endian, with no ill effects.
>>
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h | 49
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h
>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..7e975ffce837
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/checksum.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright (C) 2016 ARM Ltd.
>> + *
>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>> + *
>> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
>> + * GNU General Public License for more details.
>> + *
>> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>> + * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>> + */
>> +#ifndef __ASM_CHECKSUM_H
>> +#define __ASM_CHECKSUM_H
>> +
>> +static inline __sum16 csum_fold(__wsum csum)
>> +{
>> + u32 sum = (__force u32)csum;
>> + sum += (sum >> 16) | (sum << 16);
>> + return ~(__force __sum16)(sum >> 16);
>> +}
>> +#define csum_fold csum_fold
>> +
>> +static inline __sum16 ip_fast_csum(const void *iph, unsigned int ihl)
>> +{
>> + __uint128_t tmp;
>> + u64 sum;
>> +
>> + tmp = *(const __uint128_t *)iph;
>> + iph += 16;
>> + ihl -= 4;
>> + tmp += ((tmp >> 64) | (tmp << 64));
>> + sum = tmp >> 64;
>> + do {
>> + sum += *(const u32 *)iph;
>> + iph += 4;
>> + } while (--ihl);
>> +
>> + sum += ((sum >> 32) | (sum << 32));
>> + return csum_fold(sum >> 32);
>> +}
>> +#define ip_fast_csum ip_fast_csum
>> +
>> +#include <asm-generic/checksum.h>
>> +
>> +#endif /* __ASM_CHECKSUM_H */
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-05-12 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-12 14:26 [PATCH] arm64: Implement optimised IP checksum helpers Robin Murphy
2016-05-12 15:34 ` Luke Starrett
2016-05-12 17:08 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
2016-05-12 18:32 ` Luke Starrett
2016-06-17 17:00 ` Catalin Marinas
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=5734B899.3040207@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luke.starrett@broadcom.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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