From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: wander@redhat.com
Cc: "Jiri Slaby" <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
"Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@aj.id.au>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>,
"Johan Hovold" <johan@kernel.org>,
"Serge Semin" <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
"Pali Rohár" <pali@kernel.org>,
"open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tty: serial: Use fifo in 8250 console driver
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2021 16:45:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YcClBlhwp4arGWtw@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211104171734.137707-1-wander@redhat.com>
On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 02:17:31PM -0300, wander@redhat.com wrote:
> From: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@redhat.com>
>
> Note: I am using a small test app + driver located at [0] for the
> problem description. serco is a driver whose write function dispatches
> to the serial controller. sertest is a user-mode app that writes n bytes
> to the serial console using the serco driver.
>
> Recently I got a report of a soft lockup while loading a bunch a
> scsi_debug devices (> 500).
>
> While investigating it, I noticed that the serial console throughput
> (called by the printk code) is way below the configured speed of 115200
> bps in a HP Proliant DL380 Gen9 server. I was expecting something above
> 10KB/s, but I got 2.5KB/s. I then built a simple driver [0] to isolate
> the console from the printk code. Here it is:
>
> $ time ./sertest -n 2500 /tmp/serco
>
> real 0m0.997s
> user 0m0.000s
> sys 0m0.997s
>
> With the help of the function tracer, I then noticed the serial
> controller was taking around 410us seconds to dispatch one single byte:
>
> $ trace-cmd record -p function_graph -g serial8250_console_write \
> ./sertest -n 1 /tmp/serco
>
> $ trace-cmd report
>
> | serial8250_console_write() {
> 0.384 us | _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
> 1.836 us | io_serial_in();
> 1.667 us | io_serial_out();
> | uart_console_write() {
> | serial8250_console_putchar() {
> | wait_for_xmitr() {
> 1.870 us | io_serial_in();
> 2.238 us | }
> 1.737 us | io_serial_out();
> 4.318 us | }
> 4.675 us | }
> | wait_for_xmitr() {
> 1.635 us | io_serial_in();
> | __const_udelay() {
> 1.125 us | delay_tsc();
> 1.429 us | }
> ...
> ...
> ...
> 1.683 us | io_serial_in();
> | __const_udelay() {
> 1.248 us | delay_tsc();
> 1.486 us | }
> 1.671 us | io_serial_in();
> 411.342 us | }
>
> In another machine, I measured a throughput of 11.5KB/s, with the serial
> controller taking between 80-90us to send each byte. That matches the
> expected throughput for a configuration of 115200 bps.
>
> This patch changes the serial8250_console_write to use the 16550 fifo
> if available. In my artificial benchmark I could get a throughput
> increase up to 100% in some cases, but in the real case described at the
> beginning the gain was of about 25%.
>
> [0] https://github.com/walac/serial-console-test
>
> Signed-off-by: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@redhat.com>
> ---
> drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h | 3 ++
> drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_port.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h
> index 6473361525d1..c711bf118cc1 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250.h
> @@ -83,6 +83,9 @@ struct serial8250_config {
> #define UART_CAP_MINI BIT(17) /* Mini UART on BCM283X family lacks:
> * STOP PARITY EPAR SPAR WLEN5 WLEN6
> */
> +#define UART_CAP_CWFIFO BIT(18) /* Use the UART Fifo in
> + * serial8250_console_write
> + */
Why do you need a new bit? Why can't you just do this change for all
devices that have a fifo? Why would you _not_ want to do this for all
devices that have a fifo?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-20 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-04 17:17 [PATCH v2] tty: serial: Use fifo in 8250 console driver wander
2021-12-20 15:45 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2021-12-20 17:02 ` Wander Costa
2021-12-21 8:12 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-12-22 11:22 ` Wander Costa
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=YcClBlhwp4arGWtw@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=andrew@aj.id.au \
--cc=fancer.lancer@gmail.com \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=macro@orcam.me.uk \
--cc=pali@kernel.org \
--cc=wander@redhat.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