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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:37:39 +0800
From:	Miao Xie <miaox@...fujitsu.com>
To:	ykzhao <yakui.zhao@...el.com>
CC:	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>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64/lib: improve the performance of memmove

On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:55:18 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 15:16 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 08:48:25 +0200 (cest), Andi Kleen wrote:
>>>> 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 still don't understand why you don't simply use a backwards
>>> string copy (with std) ? That should be much simpler and
>>> hopefully be as optimized for kernel copies on recent CPUs.
>>
>> But according to the comment of memcpy, some CPUs don't support "REP" instruction,
> 
> Where do you find that the "REP" instruction is not supported on some
> CPUs? The comment in arch/x86/lib/memcpy_64.s only states that some CPUs
> will run faster when using string copy instruction.

Sorry! I misread the comment.

>> so I think we must implement a backwards string copy by other method for those CPUs,
>> But that implement is complex, so I write it as a function -- __memcpy_bwd().
> 
> Will you please look at tip/x86/ tree(mem branch)? The memory copy on
> x86_64 is already optimized.

Thanks for your reminding! It is very helpful.
Miao
 
> thanks.
>      Yakui
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Miao
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists