From: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To: 'Linus Torvalds' <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
'Noah Goldstein' <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
Cc: 'kernel test robot' <lkp@intel.com>,
"'x86@kernel.org'" <x86@kernel.org>,
"'oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev'" <oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'edumazet@google.com'" <edumazet@google.com>,
"'tglx@linutronix.de'" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"'mingo@redhat.com'" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"'bp@alien8.de'" <bp@alien8.de>,
"'dave.hansen@linux.intel.com'" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"'hpa@zytor.com'" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: RE: x86/csum: Remove unnecessary odd handling
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 16:12:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8ff2151323cd440da25fd49061d9cc44@AcuMS.aculab.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5354eeec562345f6a1de84f0b2081b75@AcuMS.aculab.com>
From: David Laight
> Sent: 05 January 2024 10:41
>
> From: Linus Torvalds
> > Sent: 05 January 2024 00:33
> >
> > On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 at 15:36, Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Anyway, since I looked at the thing originally, and feel like I know
> > > the x86 side and understand the strange IP csum too, I just applied it
> > > directly.
> >
> > I ended up just applying my 40-byte cleanup thing too that I've been
> > keeping in my own tree since posting it (as the "Silly csum
> > improvement. Maybe" patch).
>
> Interesting, I'm pretty sure trying to get two blocks of
> 'adc' scheduled in parallel like that doesn't work.
>
> I got an adc every clock from this 'beast':
> + /*
> + * Align the byte count to a multiple of 16 then
> + * add 64 bit words to alternating registers.
> + * Finally reduce to 64 bits.
> + */
> + asm( " bt $4, %[len]\n"
> + " jnc 10f\n"
> + " add (%[buff], %[len]), %[sum_0]\n"
> + " adc 8(%[buff], %[len]), %[sum_1]\n"
> + " lea 16(%[len]), %[len]\n"
> + "10: jecxz 20f\n"
> + " adc (%[buff], %[len]), %[sum_0]\n"
> + " adc 8(%[buff], %[len]), %[sum_1]\n"
> + " lea 32(%[len]), %[len_tmp]\n"
> + " adc 16(%[buff], %[len]), %[sum_0]\n"
> + " adc 24(%[buff], %[len]), %[sum_1]\n"
> + " mov %[len_tmp], %[len]\n"
> + " jmp 10b\n"
> + "20: adc %[sum_0], %[sum]\n"
> + " adc %[sum_1], %[sum]\n"
> + " adc $0, %[sum]\n"
> + : [sum] "+&r" (sum), [sum_0] "+&r" (sum_0), [sum_1] "+&r" (sum_1),
> + [len] "+&c" (len), [len_tmp] "=&r" (len_tmp)
> + : [buff] "r" (buff)
> + : "memory" );
I've got far too many x86 checksum functions lying around.
Actually you don't need all that.
Anything recent (probably Broadwell on) will execute:
"10: jecxz 20f\n"
" adc (%[buff], %[len]), %[sum]\n"
" adc 8(%[buff], %[len]), %[sum]\n"
" lea 16(%[len]), %[len]\n"
" jmp 10b\n"
"20: adc $0, %[sum]\n"
in two clocks per iteration - 8 bytes/clock.
Since it is trivial to handle 8n+4 buffers (eg as above)
that only leaves the C code to handle the final 0-7 bytes.
> Maybe I'll sort out another patch...
Probably after the next rc1 is out.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-05 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230628020657.957880-1-goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>
2023-06-28 9:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-06-28 15:32 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-06-28 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-06-28 18:34 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-06-28 20:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-06-29 14:04 ` David Laight
2023-06-29 14:27 ` David Laight
2023-09-01 22:21 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-06 13:49 ` David Laight
2023-09-06 14:38 ` David Laight
2023-09-20 19:20 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-20 19:23 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-23 3:24 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-23 14:05 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-09-23 21:13 ` David Laight
2023-09-24 14:35 ` Noah Goldstein
2023-12-23 22:18 ` Noah Goldstein
2024-01-04 23:28 ` Noah Goldstein
2024-01-04 23:34 ` Dave Hansen
2024-01-04 23:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-05 0:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-05 10:41 ` David Laight
2024-01-05 16:12 ` David Laight [this message]
2024-01-05 18:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-05 23:52 ` David Laight
2024-01-06 0:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-06 10:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-01-06 19:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-01-07 12:11 ` David Laight
2024-01-06 22:08 ` David Laight
2024-01-07 1:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2024-01-07 11:44 ` David Laight
2023-09-24 14:35 ` Noah Goldstein
2025-10-24 22:12 Ywe Cærlyn
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=8ff2151323cd440da25fd49061d9cc44@AcuMS.aculab.com \
--to=david.laight@aculab.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=goldstein.w.n@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®