From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] x86: faster mb()+other barrier.h tweaks
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:20:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160126101921-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56957D54.5000602@zytor.com>
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 02:25:24PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/12/16 14:10, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > mb() typically uses mfence on modern x86, but a micro-benchmark shows that it's
> > 2 to 3 times slower than lock; addl $0,(%%e/rsp) that we use on older CPUs.
> >
> > So let's use the locked variant everywhere - helps keep the code simple as
> > well.
> >
> > While I was at it, I found some inconsistencies in comments in
> > arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
> >
> > I hope I'm not splitting this up too much - the reason is I wanted to isolate
> > the code changes (that people might want to test for performance) from comment
> > changes approved by Linus, from (so far unreviewed) comment change I came up
> > with myself.
> >
> > Lightly tested on my system.
> >
> > Michael S. Tsirkin (3):
> > x86: drop mfence in favor of lock+addl
> > x86: drop a comment left over from X86_OOSTORE
> > x86: tweak the comment about use of wmb for IO
> >
>
> I would like to get feedback from the hardware team about the
> implications of this change, first.
>
> -hpa
>
Hi hpa,
Any luck getting some feedback on this one?
Thanks,
--
MST
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-26 8:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-12 22:10 [PATCH v2 0/3] x86: faster mb()+other barrier.h tweaks Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-01-12 22:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] x86: drop mfence in favor of lock+addl Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-01-12 22:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] x86: drop a comment left over from X86_OOSTORE Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-01-12 22:25 ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-01-12 22:10 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] x86: tweak the comment about use of wmb for IO Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-01-12 22:25 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] x86: faster mb()+other barrier.h tweaks H. Peter Anvin
2016-01-26 8:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2016-01-26 21:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-01-27 14:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-01-27 14:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-01-27 14:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
[not found] ` <20181011173707.26pekp65tlipvhdx@alap3.anarazel.de>
2018-10-11 18:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20160126101921-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).