mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@kernel.org>
To: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	"Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
	Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/lib: prefetch ahead in __csum_partial()
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 20:18:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a877ad04-c4ed-4e32-a1eb-da524146be14@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261012180052.55578-1-rosenp@gmail.com>



Le 12/10/2026 à 20:00, Rosen Penev a écrit :
> __csum_partial() walks the buffer linearly and reads each cache line
> exactly once. On cores without a hardware prefetcher, such as the 464FP
> in the APM82181, every new line is therefore a demand miss that stalls
> the loop. Packets received by non-coherent DMA are never in the cache,
> so this is the common case for GRO checksum validation: when routing
> TCP with GRO enabled on a Meraki MX60, __csum_partial() takes about 30%
> of all cycles and is the top entry in the profile.
> 
> Issue a dcbt four cache lines (128 bytes) ahead in the main loop.
> dcbt is only a hint and never faults, so prefetching past the end of
> the buffer is harmless. Lines that are already cached, for example when
> checksumming data the CPU just wrote, are left untouched.
> 
> Measured on a Meraki MX60 (APM82181 at 800 MHz), single TCP stream
> routed through a qca8k DSA switch, iperf3 median of 5. Only the dcbt
> was toggled at runtime, in the same boot:
> 
>                LAN->WAN               WAN->LAN
>                Mbit/s  csum cycles    Mbit/s  csum cycles
>    before      495     30.5%          439     27.2%
>    after       599     15.3%          520     13.7%
> 
> That is 58% less time spent in __csum_partial() per byte.
> 
> The prefetch distance was chosen with an earlier, slower driver
> configuration (median of 3, Mbit/s):
> 
>    distance    LAN->WAN   WAN->LAN
>    none        370        341
>    64 bytes    430        381
>    96 bytes    438        397
>    128 bytes   438        385
>    160 bytes   434        386
>    256 bytes   423        383
> 
> Prefetching the first lines before entering the loop made no
> measurable difference and is not done.
> 
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>

csum_partial_copy_generic() does the same, so your patch makes sense.

Wondering if you should use MAX_COPY_PREFETCH instead of hardcoding value 4.

Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP) <chleroy@kernel.org>

> ---
>   v2: reword commit message and retest numbers.
>   arch/powerpc/lib/checksum_32.S | 4 +++-
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/lib/checksum_32.S b/arch/powerpc/lib/checksum_32.S
> index cd00b9bdd772..5a14d45c7b9d 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/lib/checksum_32.S
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/lib/checksum_32.S
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ _GLOBAL(__csum_partial)
>   	bdnz	2b
>   21:	srwi.	r6,r4,4		/* # blocks of 4 words to do */
>   	beq	3f
> +	li	r9,4*L1_CACHE_BYTES	/* prefetch distance */
>   	lwz	r0,4(r3)
>   	mtctr	r6
>   	lwz	r6,8(r3)
> @@ -52,7 +53,8 @@ _GLOBAL(__csum_partial)
>   	lwzu	r8,16(r3)
>   	adde	r5,r5,r7
>   	bdz	23f
> -22:	lwz	r0,4(r3)
> +22:	dcbt	r3,r9
> +	lwz	r0,4(r3)
>   	adde	r5,r5,r8
>   	lwz	r6,8(r3)
>   	adde	r5,r5,r0


  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-12 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-12 18:00 Rosen Penev
2026-10-12 18:18 ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP) [this message]
2026-10-12 18:28   ` Rosen Penev
2026-10-12 18:38     ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-10-12 20:27       ` Rosen Penev

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=a877ad04-c4ed-4e32-a1eb-da524146be14@kernel.org \
    --to=chleroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=rosenp@gmail.com \
    --cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.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®