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: <1284684918.13201.114.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:55:18 +0800
From:	ykzhao <yakui.zhao@...el.com>
To:	"miaox@...fujitsu.com" <miaox@...fujitsu.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 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. 
  
> 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.
    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-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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ