linux-kernel - Re: [Intel IOMMU 00/10] Intel IOMMU support, take #2

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]

Message-ID: <20070626111324.GB4320@rhun.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:13:24 -0400
From:	Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@...ibm.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Keshavamurthy, Anil S" <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...e.de,
	suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
	ashok.raj@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net, clameter@....com
Subject: Re: [Intel IOMMU 00/10] Intel IOMMU support, take #2

On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 09:12:45AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:

> There are some potential performance benefits too:
> - When you have a device that cannot address the complete address range
> an IOMMU can remap its memory instead of bounce buffering. Remapping
> is likely cheaper than copying. 

But those devices aren't likely to be found on modern systems.

> - The IOMMU can merge sg lists into a single virtual block. This could
> potentially speed up SG IO when the device is slow walking SG lists.
> [I long ago benchmarked 5% on some block benchmark with an old
> MPT Fusion; but it probably depends a lot on the HBA]

But most devices are SG-capable.

> And you get better driver debugging because unexpected memory
> accesses from the devices will cause an trapable event.

That and direct-access for KVM the big ones, IMHO, and definitely
justify merging.

> > Does it slow anything down?
> 
> It adds more overhead to each IO so yes.

How much? we have numbers (to be presented at OLS later this week)
that show that on bare-metal an IOMMU can cost as much as 15%-30% more
CPU utilization for an IO intensive workload (netperf). It will be
interesting to see comparable numbers for VT-d.

Cheers,
Muli
-
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/