[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45D1A092.6030804@cosmosbay.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 12:27:14 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
CC: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@...hscale.com>,
Roland Dreier <rolandd@...co.com>, patches@...-64.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.21 review I] [21/25] x86_64: a memcpy that tries to
reduce cache pressure
Andi Kleen a écrit :
> From: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@...hscale.com>
>
> This copy routine is memcpy-compatible, but on some architectures will use
> cache-bypassing loads to avoid bringing the source data into the cache.
>
> One case where this is useful is when a device issues a DMA to a memory
> region, and the CPU must copy the DMAed data elsewhere before doing any work
> with it. Since the source data is read-once, write-never from the CPU's
> perspective, caching the data at those addresses can only evict potentially
> useful data.
>
> We provide an x86_64 implementation that uses SSE non-temporal loads, and a
> generic version that falls back to plain memcpy.
> + movq %r11, 56(%rdi)
> + addq %rcx, %rdi
> + cmpq %rdx, %rcx /* is rdx >= 64? */
> + jbe .L42
> + sfence
> + orl %edx, %edx
> + je .L33
I have three questions/remarks
1) Just curious why sfence is necessary here ?
2) Shouldnt we use this for large buffers, and restrict them to a size
multiple of 64, to avoid all these conditional branches ?
3) Also, the first 128 bytes of the source buffer will be bring into cache.
-
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