[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m28vbkx3hw.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 09:55:39 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
Cc: konrad.wilk@...cle.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, rob@...dley.net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
joerg.roedel@....com, bhelgaas@...gle.com, shuahkhan@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...uxdriverproject.org,
x86@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Improve swiotlb performance by using physical addresses
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com> writes:
> While working on 10Gb/s routing performance I found a significant amount of
> time was being spent in the swiotlb DMA handler. Further digging found that a
> significant amount of this was due to the fact that virtual to physical
> address translation and calling the function that did it. It accounted for
> nearly 60% of the total overhead.
Can you find out why that is? Traditionally virt_to_phys was just a
subtraction. Then later on it was a if and a subtraction.
It cannot really be that expensive. Do you have some debugging enabled?
Really virt_to_phys should be fixed. Such fundamental operations
shouldn't slow. I don't think hacking up all the users to work
around this is the r ight way.
Looking at the code a bit someone (crazy) made it out of line.
But that cannot explain that much overhead.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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