[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171018125849.GD4077@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 13:58:49 +0100
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
iommu <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
Libin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>, Jinyue Li <lijinyue@...wei.com>,
Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: put off the execution of TLBI*
to reduce lock confliction
Hi Thunder,
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 09:00:36PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
> Because all TLBI commands should be followed by a SYNC command, to make
> sure that it has been completely finished. So we can just add the TLBI
> commands into the queue, and put off the execution until meet SYNC or
> other commands. To prevent the followed SYNC command waiting for a long
> time because of too many commands have been delayed, restrict the max
> delayed number.
>
> According to my test, I got the same performance data as I replaced writel
> with writel_relaxed in queue_inc_prod.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
> ---
> drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
If we want to go down the route of explicit command batching, I'd much
rather do it by implementing the iotlb_range_add callback in the driver,
and have a fixed-length array of batched ranges on the domain. We could
potentially toggle this function pointer based on the compatible string too,
if it shows only to benefit some systems.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists