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, 12 Nov 2009 22:04:06 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: "Ma, Ling" <ling.ma@...el.com> CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, "mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] [X86] performance improvement for memcpy_64.S by fast string. On 11/12/2009 09:33 PM, Ma, Ling wrote: >> Well, so you are running cache hot and it is only a win on huge >> copies... how common are those? >> > Hi Pavel Machek > Yes, we intend to introduce movsq for huge hot size(over 1024bytes) > and avoid regression for less 1024bytes. I guess you suggest using > prefetch instruction for cold data (if I was wrong please correct me). > memcpy don't know whether data has been in cache or not, > so only when copy size is over (first level 1 cache)/2 and lower > (last level cache)/2 , prefetch will get benefit. Currently first > level cache size of most cpus is around 32KB, so it is useful for prefetch > when copy size is over 16KB, but as H. Peter Anvin mentioned in last email, > over 16KB copy in kernel is rare. > What it sounds to me is that for Nehalem, we want to use memcpy_c for >= 1024 bytes and the old code for < 1024 bytes; for Core2 it might be the exact opposite. Either way, whatever we do should use the appropriate static replacement mechanism. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- 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