mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Charlie Jenkins' <charlie@rivosinc.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>,
	Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@sifive.com>,
	"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 2/5] riscv: Add checksum library
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 08:45:38 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1818c4114b0e4144a9df21f235984840@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230911-optimize_checksum-v4-2-77cc2ad9e9d7@rivosinc.com>

From: Charlie Jenkins
> Sent: 11 September 2023 23:57
> 
> Provide a 32 and 64 bit version of do_csum. When compiled for 32-bit
> will load from the buffer in groups of 32 bits, and when compiled for
> 64-bit will load in groups of 64 bits. Benchmarking by proxy compiling
> csum_ipv6_magic (64-bit version) for an x86 chip as well as running
> the riscv generated code in QEMU, discovered that summing in a
> tree-like structure is about 4% faster than doing 64-bit reads.
> 
...
> +	sum   = saddr->s6_addr32[0];
> +	sum  += saddr->s6_addr32[1];
> +	sum1  = saddr->s6_addr32[2];
> +	sum1 += saddr->s6_addr32[3];
> +
> +	sum2  = daddr->s6_addr32[0];
> +	sum2 += daddr->s6_addr32[1];
> +	sum3  = daddr->s6_addr32[2];
> +	sum3 += daddr->s6_addr32[3];
> +
> +	sum4  = csum;
> +	sum4 += ulen;
> +	sum4 += uproto;
> +
> +	sum  += sum1;
> +	sum2 += sum3;
> +
> +	sum += sum2;
> +	sum += sum4;

Have you got gcc to compile that as-is?

Whenever I've tried to get a 'tree add' compiled so that the
early adds can be executed in parallel gcc always pessimises
it to a linear sequence of adds.

But I agree that adding 32bit values to a 64bit register
may be no slower than trying to do an 'add carry' sequence
that is guaranteed to only do one add/clock.
(And on Intel cpu from core-2 until IIRC Haswell adc took 2 clocks!)

IIRC RISCV doesn't have a carry flag, so the adc sequence
is hard - probably takes two extra instructions per value.
Although with parallel execute it may not matter.
Consider:
	val = buf[offset];
	sum += val;
	carry += sum < val;
	val = buf[offset1];
	sum += val;
	...
the compare and 'carry +=' can be executed at the same time
as the following two instructions.
You do then a final sum += carry; sum += sum < carry;

Assuming all instructions are 1 clock and any read delays
get filled with other instructions (by source or hardware
instruction re-ordering) even without parallel execute
that is 4 clocks for 64 bits, which is much the same as the
2 clocks for 32 bits.

Remember that all the 32bit values can summed first as
they won't overflow.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-12  8:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-11 22:57 [PATCH v4 0/5] riscv: Add fine-tuned checksum functions Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-11 22:57 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] riscv: Checksum header Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-12 10:24   ` Emil Renner Berthing
2023-09-13  2:38     ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-13  9:19       ` Emil Renner Berthing
2023-09-11 22:57 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] riscv: Add checksum library Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-12  8:45   ` David Laight [this message]
2023-09-13  3:09     ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-13  8:47       ` David Laight
2023-09-13 23:18         ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-14  0:41           ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-14 12:25   ` Conor Dooley
2023-09-14 17:58     ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-14 18:02       ` Conor Dooley
2023-09-14 23:30         ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-11 22:57 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] riscv: Vector checksum header Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-11 22:57 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] riscv: Vector checksum library Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-14 12:46   ` Conor Dooley
2023-09-14 16:14     ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-14 16:29       ` Conor Dooley
2023-09-14 17:29         ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-14 17:36           ` Conor Dooley
2023-09-14 20:59             ` Charlie Jenkins
2023-09-11 22:57 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] riscv: Test checksum functions Charlie Jenkins

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=1818c4114b0e4144a9df21f235984840@AcuMS.aculab.com \
    --to=david.laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=charlie@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=conor@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=samuel.holland@sifive.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®