[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54892B87.3020909@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 21:28:39 -0800
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net
CC: mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, peterz@...radead.org,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
mingo@...nel.org, mikey@...ling.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
donald.c.skidmore@...el.com, matthew.vick@...el.com,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
romieu@...zoreil.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
nic_swsd@...ltek.com, will.deacon@....com, michael@...erman.id.au,
tony.luck@...el.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
oleg@...hat.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/4] arch: Add lightweight memory barriers for coherent
memory access
On 11/25/2014 12:35 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> These patches introduce two new primitives for synchronizing cache coherent
> memory writes and reads. These two new primitives are:
>
> dma_rmb()
> dma_wmb()
>
> The first patch cleans up some unnecessary overhead related to the
> definition of read_barrier_depends, smp_read_barrier_depends, and comments
> related to the barrier.
>
> The second patch adds the primitives for the applicable architectures and
> asm-generic.
>
> The third patch adds the barriers to r8169 which turns out to be a good
> example of where the new barriers might be useful as they have full
> rmb()/wmb() barriers ordering accesses to the descriptors and the DescOwn
> bit.
>
> The fourth patch adds support for coherent_rmb() to the Intel fm10k, igb,
> and ixgbe drivers. Testing with the ixgbe driver has shown a processing
> time reduction of at least 7ns per 64B frame on a Core i7-4930K.
>
> This patch series is essentially the v7 for:
> v4-6: Add lightweight memory barriers for coherent memory access
> v3: Add lightweight memory barriers fast_rmb() and fast_wmb()
> v2: Introduce load_acquire() and store_release()
> v1: Introduce read_acquire()
>
> The key changes in this patch series versus the earlier patches are:
> v7:
> - Dropped test/debug patch that was accidentally slipped in
> v6:
> - Replaced "memory based device I/O" with "consistent memory" in
> docs
> - Added reference to DMA-API.txt to explain consistent memory
> v5:
> - Renamed barriers dma_rmb and dma_wmb
> - Undid smp_wmb changes in x86 and PowerPC
> - Defined smp_rmb as __lwsync for SMP case on PowerPC
> v4:
> - Renamed barriers coherent_rmb and coherent_wmb
> - Added smp_lwsync for use in smp_load_acquire/smp_store_release
> v3:
> - Moved away from acquire()/store() and instead focused on barriers
> - Added cleanup of read_barrier_depends
> - Added change in r8169 to fix cur_tx/DescOwn ordering
> - Simplified changes to just replacing/moving barriers in r8169
> - Added update to documentation with code example
> v2:
> - Renamed read_acquire() to be consistent with smp_load_acquire()
> - Changed barrier used to be consistent with smp_load_acquire()
> - Updated PowerPC code to use __lwsync based on IBM article
> - Added store_release() as this is a viable use case for drivers
> - Added r8169 patch which is able to fully use primitives
> - Added fm10k/igb/ixgbe patch which is able to test performance
>
> ---
>
> Alexander Duyck (4):
> arch: Cleanup read_barrier_depends() and comments
> arch: Add lightweight memory barriers dma_rmb() and dma_wmb()
> r8169: Use dma_rmb() and dma_wmb() for DescOwn checks
> fm10k/igb/ixgbe: Use dma_rmb on Rx descriptor reads
>
>
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 42 +++++++++++++++
> arch/alpha/include/asm/barrier.h | 51 ++++++++++++++++++
> arch/arm/include/asm/barrier.h | 4 +
> arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h | 3 +
> arch/blackfin/include/asm/barrier.h | 51 ++++++++++++++++++
> arch/ia64/include/asm/barrier.h | 25 ++++-----
> arch/metag/include/asm/barrier.h | 19 ++++---
> arch/mips/include/asm/barrier.h | 61 ++--------------------
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h | 19 ++++---
> arch/s390/include/asm/barrier.h | 7 ++-
> arch/sparc/include/asm/barrier_64.h | 7 ++-
> arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 70 ++++---------------------
> arch/x86/um/asm/barrier.h | 20 ++++---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/fm10k/fm10k_main.c | 6 +-
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 6 +-
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 9 +--
> drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169.c | 29 ++++++++--
> include/asm-generic/barrier.h | 8 +++
> 18 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 179 deletions(-)
>
> --
It occurs to me that I never got a sign off from any of the maintainers
on getting this pulled in.
Since the merge window is open I was wondering which tree I should make
sure these patches apply to and who will be the one to pull them in?
Since I was modifying network drivers should I resubmit them for netdev,
or should I submit them for asm-generic or some other tree?
- Alex
--
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