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: <ba64069e-f3a3-de85-df47-01008d7b3513@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Mon, 3 Jul 2017 09:24:59 -0500
From:   Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@...eaurora.org>
To:     Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gpkulkarni@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Vikram Sethi <vikrams@...eaurora.org>,
        Jayachandran C <jnair@...iumnetworks.com>,
        "ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com" <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip: gicv3-its: Use NUMA aware memory allocation for
 ITS tables

Hi Marc,

On 06/30/2017 03:51 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 30/06/17 04:01, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ganapatrao Kulkarni
>> <gpkulkarni@...il.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Shanker,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Shanker Donthineni
>>> <shankerd@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>>>> The NUMA node information is visible to ITS driver but not being used
>>>> other than handling errata. This patch allocates the memory for ITS
>>>> tables from the corresponding NUMA node using the appropriate NUMA
>>>> aware functions.
>>
>> IMHO, the description would have been more constructive?
>>
>> "All ITS tables are mapped by default to NODE 0 memory.
>> Adding changes to allocate memory from respective NUMA NODES of ITS devices.
>> This will optimize tables access and avoids unnecessary inter-node traffic."
> 
> But more importantly, I'd like to see figures showing the actual benefit
> of this per-node allocation. Given that both of you guys have access to
> such platforms, please show me the numbers!
> 

I'll share the actual results which shows the improvement whenever 
available on our next chips. Current version of Qualcomm qdf2400 doesn't 
support multi socket configuration to capture results and share with you. 

Do you see any other issues with this patch apart from the performance 
improvements. I strongly believe this brings the noticeable improvement 
in numbers on systems where it has multi node memory/CPU configuration.


> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
> 

-- 
Shanker Donthineni
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ