linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block/ps3: Fix slow VRAM IO

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Nov 2009 00:23:22 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Geoff Levand <geoffrey.levand@...sony.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, Jim Paris <jim@...n.com>,
	Cell Broadband Engine OSS Development 
	<cbe-oss-dev@...abs.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <Geert.Uytterhoeven@...ycom.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block/ps3: Fix slow VRAM IO

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:58:27 -0700 Geoff Levand <geoffrey.levand@...sony.com> wrote:

> 
> From: Hideyuki Sasaki <Hideyuki_Sasaki@...scei.sony.co.jp>
> 
> The current PS3 VRAM driver uses msleep() to wait for completion
> of RSX DMA transfers between system memory and VRAM.  Depending
> on the system timing, the processing delay and overhead of this
> msleep() call can significantly impact VRAM driver IO.
> 
> To avoid the condition, add a short duration (200 usec max)
> udelay() polling loop before entering the msleep() polling
> loop.
> 

When raising a performance-based patch, please always try to include
before-and-after performance measurements in the changelog.  People
want to know the magnitude of the improvement.

> 
>  drivers/block/ps3vram.c |   10 +++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> --- a/drivers/block/ps3vram.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/ps3vram.c
> @@ -123,7 +123,15 @@ static int ps3vram_notifier_wait(struct 
>  {
>  	struct ps3vram_priv *priv = ps3_system_bus_get_drvdata(dev);
>  	u32 *notify = ps3vram_get_notifier(priv->reports, NOTIFIER);
> -	unsigned long timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(timeout_ms);
> +	unsigned long timeout;
> +
> +	for (timeout = 20; timeout; timeout--) {

	for (timeout = 0; timeout < 20; timeout++) {

would be simpler.

> +		if (!notify[3])
> +			return 0;
> +		udelay(10);
> +	}

You might as well do a udelay(1) here.  The additional cost will be
negligible, and it will reduce latency.

> +	timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(timeout_ms);

The maximum latency is now timout_ms + 200usec.

That's OK with the current constants, but if someone later changes a
constant, the error could become significant.

Perhaps that isn't worth bothering about though.

>  	do {
>  		if (!notify[3])


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/