| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:31:43 +0800
From: Miao Xie <miaox@...fujitsu.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
CC: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] x86_64/lib: improve the performance of memmove
When the dest and the src do overlap and the memory area is large, memmove of
x86_64 is very inefficient, and it led to bad performance, such as btrfs's file
deletion performance. This patch improved the performance of memmove on x86_64
by using __memcpy_bwd() instead of byte copy when doing large memory area copy
(len > 64).
I have tested this patchset by doing 500 bytes memory copy for 50000 times
with various alignments and buffer sizes on my x86_64 box:
Len Src Unalign Dest Unalign Without Patch Patch applied
--- ----------- ------------ ------------- -------------
256 0 0 0s 815158us 0s 249647us
256 0 4 0s 816059us 0s 324210us
256 0 7 0s 815192us 0s 324254us
256 3 0 0s 815179us 0s 325991us
256 3 1 0s 815161us 0s 378462us
256 3 4 0s 815154us 0s 779306us
256 3 7 0s 815151us 0s 782924us
256 7 0 0s 815839us 0s 325524us
256 7 4 0s 815149us 0s 375658us
256 7 7 0s 815160us 0s 374488us
1024 0 0 3s 125891us 0s 437662us
1024 0 1 3s 125940us 0s 777524us
1024 0 4 3s 159788us 0s 778850us
1024 0 7 3s 155177us 0s 733927us
1024 4 0 3s 118323us 0s 830167us
1024 4 4 3s 129124us 0s 962505us
1024 4 7 3s 123456us 2s 600326us
After appling this patchset, the performance of the file creation and deletion
on some filesystem become better. I have tested it with the following benchmark
tool on my x86_64 box.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-btrfs&m=128212635122920&q=p3
Test steps:
# ./creat_unlink 50000
The result(Total time):
Ext4:
2.6.36-rc4 2.6.36-rc4 + patch
file creation 0.737007 0.701888 4.8%UP
file deletion 0.422226 0.413457 2.1%UP
Btrfs:
2.6.36-rc4 2.6.36-rc4 + patch
file creation 0.977638 0.935208 4.3%UP
file deletion 1.327140 1.221073 8%UP
Signed-off-by: Miao Xie <miaox@...fujitsu.com>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h | 1 +
arch/x86/lib/Makefile | 2 +-
arch/x86/lib/memcpy_bwd_64.S | 137 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/x86/lib/memmove_64.c | 10 ++-
4 files changed, 145 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/x86/lib/memcpy_bwd_64.S
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h
index 19e2c46..4e64a87 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ extern void *__memcpy(void *to, const void *from, size_t len);
void *memset(void *s, int c, size_t n);
#define __HAVE_ARCH_MEMMOVE
+extern void *__memcpy_bwd(void *dest, const void *src, size_t count);
void *memmove(void *dest, const void *src, size_t count);
int memcmp(const void *cs, const void *ct, size_t count);
diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/Makefile b/arch/x86/lib/Makefile
index e10cf07..ab241df 100644
--- a/arch/x86/lib/Makefile
+++ b/arch/x86/lib/Makefile
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += msr-smp.o cache-smp.o
lib-y := delay.o
lib-y += thunk_$(BITS).o
lib-y += usercopy_$(BITS).o getuser.o putuser.o
-lib-y += memcpy_$(BITS).o
+lib-y += memcpy_$(BITS).o memcpy_bwd_$(BITS).o
lib-$(CONFIG_INSTRUCTION_DECODER) += insn.o inat.o
obj-y += msr.o msr-reg.o msr-reg-export.o
diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/memcpy_bwd_64.S b/arch/x86/lib/memcpy_bwd_64.S
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ca894e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/x86/lib/memcpy_bwd_64.S
@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
+/* Copyright 2010 Miao Xie */
+
+#include <linux/linkage.h>
+
+#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
+#include <asm/dwarf2.h>
+
+/*
+ * __memcpy_bwd - Copy a memory block from the end to the beginning
+ *
+ * Input:
+ * rdi destination
+ * rsi source
+ * rdx count
+ *
+ * Output:
+ * rax original destination
+ */
+
+ .section .altinstr_replacement, "ax", @progbits
+.Lmemcpy_bwd_c:
+ movq %rdi, %rax
+
+ addq %rdx, %rdi
+ addq %rdx, %rsi
+ leaq -8(%rdi), %rdi
+ leaq -8(%rsi), %rsi
+
+ std
+
+ movq %rdx, %rcx
+ shrq $3, %rcx
+ andq $7, %rdx
+ rep movsq
+
+ leaq 8(%rdi), %rdi
+ leaq 8(%rsi), %rsi
+ decq %rsi
+ decq %rdi
+ movq %rdx, %rcx
+ rep movsb
+
+ cld
+ ret
+.Lmemcpy_bwd_e:
+ .previous
+
+ENTRY(__memcpy_bwd)
+ CFI_STARTPROC
+
+ movq %rdi, %rax
+
+ addq %rdx, %rdi
+ addq %rdx, %rsi
+
+ movq %rdx, %rcx
+ shrq $6, %rcx
+ jz .Lhandle_tail
+
+ .p2align 4
+.Lloop_64:
+ decq %rcx
+
+ leaq -64(%rdi), %rdi
+ leaq -64(%rsi), %rsi
+
+ movq 7*8(%rsi), %r11
+ movq 6*8(%rsi), %r8
+ movq %r11, 7*8(%rdi)
+ movq %r8, 6*8(%rdi)
+
+ movq 5*8(%rsi), %r9
+ movq 4*8(%rsi), %r10
+ movq %r9, 5*8(%rdi)
+ movq %r10, 4*8(%rdi)
+
+ movq 3*8(%rsi), %r11
+ movq 2*8(%rsi), %r8
+ movq %r11, 3*8(%rdi)
+ movq %r8, 2*8(%rdi)
+
+ movq 1*8(%rsi), %r9
+ movq 0*8(%rsi), %r10
+ movq %r9, 1*8(%rdi)
+ movq %r10, 0*8(%rdi)
+
+ jnz .Lloop_64
+
+.Lhandle_tail:
+ movq %rdx, %rcx
+ andq $63, %rcx
+ shrq $3, %rcx
+ jz .Lhandle_7
+
+ .p2align 4
+.Lloop_8:
+ decq %rcx
+
+ leaq -8(%rsi), %rsi
+ leaq -8(%rdi), %rdi
+
+ movq (%rsi), %r8
+ movq %r8, (%rdi)
+
+ jnz .Lloop_8
+
+.Lhandle_7:
+ movq %rdx, %rcx
+ andq $7, %rcx
+ jz .Lend
+
+ .p2align 4
+.Lloop_1:
+ decq %rcx
+
+ decq %rsi
+ decq %rdi
+
+ movb (%rsi), %r8b
+ movb %r8b, (%rdi)
+
+ jnz .Lloop_1
+
+.Lend:
+ ret
+ CFI_ENDPROC
+ENDPROC(__memcpy_bwd)
+
+ .section .altinstructions, "a"
+ .align 8
+ .quad __memcpy_bwd
+ .quad .Lmemcpy_bwd_c
+ .word X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD
+
+ .byte .Lmemcpy_bwd_e - .Lmemcpy_bwd_c
+ .byte .Lmemcpy_bwd_e - .Lmemcpy_bwd_c
+ .previous
diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/memmove_64.c b/arch/x86/lib/memmove_64.c
index 0a33909..bd4cbcc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/lib/memmove_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/lib/memmove_64.c
@@ -8,14 +8,16 @@
#undef memmove
void *memmove(void *dest, const void *src, size_t count)
{
- if (dest < src) {
+ if (dest < src || dest - src >= count)
return memcpy(dest, src, count);
- } else {
+ else if (count <= 64) {
char *p = dest + count;
const char *s = src + count;
while (count--)
*--p = *--s;
- }
- return dest;
+
+ return dest;
+ } else
+ return __memcpy_bwd(dest, src, count);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(memmove);
--
1.7.0.1
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists