From: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Doug Berger <opendmb@gmail.com>, Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>,
Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Thibaud Cornic <thibaud_cornic@sigmadesigns.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 10:49:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <de05d33b-0e7d-30b2-d9ba-e298ebc7bdd9@sigmadesigns.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a0dc9054-9c37-cc3b-eca5-f68080d5731c@sigmadesigns.com>
On 21/08/2017 15:25, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
> Using separate mask and ack functions (i.e. my patch)
>
> # iperf3 -c 172.27.64.110 -t 20
> Connecting to host 172.27.64.110, port 5201
> [ 4] local 172.27.64.1 port 40868 connected to 172.27.64.110 port 5201
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 106 MBytes 888 Mbits/sec 18 324 KBytes
> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 106 MBytes 885 Mbits/sec 0 361 KBytes
> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 105 MBytes 883 Mbits/sec 4 279 KBytes
> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 106 MBytes 890 Mbits/sec 0 300 KBytes
> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 106 MBytes 887 Mbits/sec 0 310 KBytes
> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 105 MBytes 883 Mbits/sec 0 315 KBytes
> [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 105 MBytes 885 Mbits/sec 0 321 KBytes
> [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 105 MBytes 880 Mbits/sec 0 325 KBytes
> [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 106 MBytes 888 Mbits/sec 0 329 KBytes
> [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 106 MBytes 886 Mbits/sec 0 335 KBytes
> [ 4] 10.00-11.00 sec 105 MBytes 885 Mbits/sec 0 351 KBytes
> [ 4] 11.00-12.00 sec 106 MBytes 887 Mbits/sec 1 276 KBytes
> [ 4] 12.00-13.00 sec 106 MBytes 885 Mbits/sec 0 321 KBytes
> [ 4] 13.00-14.00 sec 105 MBytes 883 Mbits/sec 0 349 KBytes
> [ 4] 14.00-15.00 sec 106 MBytes 890 Mbits/sec 0 366 KBytes
> [ 4] 15.00-16.00 sec 106 MBytes 888 Mbits/sec 2 286 KBytes
> [ 4] 16.00-17.00 sec 105 MBytes 884 Mbits/sec 0 303 KBytes
> [ 4] 17.00-18.00 sec 105 MBytes 883 Mbits/sec 0 311 KBytes
> [ 4] 18.00-19.00 sec 105 MBytes 880 Mbits/sec 0 315 KBytes
> [ 4] 19.00-20.00 sec 106 MBytes 890 Mbits/sec 0 321 KBytes
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
> [ 4] 0.00-20.00 sec 2.06 GBytes 885 Mbits/sec 25 sender
>
>
> Using combined mask and ack functions (i.e. Doug's patch)
>
> # iperf3 -c 172.27.64.110 -t 20
> Connecting to host 172.27.64.110, port 5201
> [ 4] local 172.27.64.1 port 41235 connected to 172.27.64.110 port 5201
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
> [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 107 MBytes 897 Mbits/sec 60 324 KBytes
> [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 107 MBytes 898 Mbits/sec 0 361 KBytes
> [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 107 MBytes 898 Mbits/sec 39 194 KBytes
> [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 107 MBytes 895 Mbits/sec 0 214 KBytes
> [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 107 MBytes 901 Mbits/sec 0 223 KBytes
> [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 108 MBytes 902 Mbits/sec 0 230 KBytes
> [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 107 MBytes 895 Mbits/sec 0 242 KBytes
> [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 107 MBytes 901 Mbits/sec 0 253 KBytes
> [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 107 MBytes 899 Mbits/sec 0 264 KBytes
> [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 108 MBytes 903 Mbits/sec 0 276 KBytes
> [ 4] 10.00-11.00 sec 108 MBytes 902 Mbits/sec 0 286 KBytes
> [ 4] 11.00-12.00 sec 107 MBytes 899 Mbits/sec 0 300 KBytes
> [ 4] 12.00-13.00 sec 107 MBytes 898 Mbits/sec 33 247 KBytes
> [ 4] 13.00-14.00 sec 107 MBytes 900 Mbits/sec 0 294 KBytes
> [ 4] 14.00-15.00 sec 107 MBytes 900 Mbits/sec 0 325 KBytes
> [ 4] 15.00-16.00 sec 107 MBytes 899 Mbits/sec 0 342 KBytes
> [ 4] 16.00-17.00 sec 107 MBytes 898 Mbits/sec 0 351 KBytes
> [ 4] 17.00-18.00 sec 108 MBytes 902 Mbits/sec 0 355 KBytes
> [ 4] 18.00-19.00 sec 107 MBytes 901 Mbits/sec 0 359 KBytes
> [ 4] 19.00-20.00 sec 108 MBytes 903 Mbits/sec 32 255 KBytes
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
> [ 4] 0.00-20.00 sec 2.09 GBytes 900 Mbits/sec 164 sender
>
>
> Ergo, it seems that the performance improvement of the combined
> implementation is approximately 1.5% for a load generating ~80k
> interrupts per second.
Hello irqchip maintainers,
As mentioned upthread, there is a bug in drivers/irqchip/irq-tango.c
caused by the unexpected implementation of irq_gc_mask_disable_reg_and_ack()
That bug can be fixed either by using an appropriate irq_mask_ack callback,
or by not defining an irq_mask_ack callback at all. The first option provides
~1.5% more throughput than the second, for a typical use-case.
Whichever option you favor, can we fix this bug in current and stable branches?
(The fix was submitted two months ago.)
Regards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-18 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-19 19:07 [PATCH v2 0/6] Add support for BCM7271 style interrupt controller Doug Berger
2017-07-19 19:07 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] genirq: generic chip: add irq_gc_mask_disable_and_ack_set() Doug Berger
2017-07-19 19:07 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/tango: Use irq_gc_mask_disable_and_ack_set Doug Berger
2017-07-24 16:40 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-07-24 17:54 ` Doug Berger
2017-07-25 13:08 ` [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Marc Gonzalez
2017-07-25 13:16 ` Måns Rullgård
2017-07-25 13:26 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-07-25 13:29 ` Måns Rullgård
2017-07-26 18:20 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-07-26 19:13 ` Måns Rullgård
2017-07-27 18:17 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-07-28 14:06 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-08-07 12:56 ` Marc Zyngier
2017-08-18 18:24 ` Florian Fainelli
2017-08-19 16:05 ` Måns Rullgård
2017-08-21 13:25 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-09-18 8:49 ` Marc Gonzalez [this message]
2017-07-25 14:15 ` Marc Gonzalez
2017-07-19 19:07 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] genirq: generic chip: remove irq_gc_mask_disable_reg_and_ack() Doug Berger
2017-07-19 19:07 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] irqchip: brcmstb-l2: Remove some processing from the handler Doug Berger
2017-07-19 19:07 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] irqchip: brcmstb-l2: Abstract register accesses Doug Berger
2017-07-19 19:07 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] irqchip: brcmstb-l2: Add support for the BCM7271 L2 controller Doug Berger
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=de05d33b-0e7d-30b2-d9ba-e298ebc7bdd9@sigmadesigns.com \
--to=marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mans@mansr.com \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=opendmb@gmail.com \
--cc=slash.tmp@free.fr \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thibaud_cornic@sigmadesigns.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
Powered by JetHome