linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: avoid redundant CMD

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: <1533815333-17320-3-git-send-email-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Aug 2018 19:48:53 +0800
From:   Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        iommu <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>,
        LinuxArm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
        Libin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: avoid redundant CMD_SYNCs if possible

More than two CMD_SYNCs maybe adjacent in the command queue, and the first
one has done what others want to do. Drop the redundant CMD_SYNCs can
improve IO performance especially under the pressure scene.

I did the statistics in my test environment, the number of CMD_SYNCs can
be reduced about 1/3. See below:
CMD_SYNCs reduced:	19542181
CMD_SYNCs total:	58098548	(include reduced)
CMDs total:		116197099	(TLBI:SYNC about 1:1)

Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
---
 drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
index d17a9a7..b96d2d2 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c
@@ -567,6 +567,7 @@ struct arm_smmu_device {
 	int				gerr_irq;
 	int				combined_irq;
 	u32				sync_nr;
+	u8				prev_cmd_opcode;

 	unsigned long			ias; /* IPA */
 	unsigned long			oas; /* PA */
@@ -775,6 +776,11 @@ static int queue_remove_raw(struct arm_smmu_queue *q, u64 *ent)
 	return 0;
 }

+static inline u8 arm_smmu_cmd_opcode_get(u64 *cmd)
+{
+	return cmd[0] & CMDQ_0_OP;
+}
+
 /* High-level queue accessors */
 static int arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd(u64 *cmd, struct arm_smmu_cmdq_ent *ent)
 {
@@ -900,6 +906,8 @@ static void arm_smmu_cmdq_insert_cmd(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu, u64 *cmd)
 	struct arm_smmu_queue *q = &smmu->cmdq.q;
 	bool wfe = !!(smmu->features & ARM_SMMU_FEAT_SEV);

+	smmu->prev_cmd_opcode = arm_smmu_cmd_opcode_get(cmd);
+
 	while (queue_insert_raw(q, cmd) == -ENOSPC) {
 		if (queue_poll_cons(q, false, wfe))
 			dev_err_ratelimited(smmu->dev, "CMDQ timeout\n");
@@ -952,9 +960,17 @@ static int __arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_sync_msi(struct arm_smmu_device *smmu)
 	};

 	spin_lock_irqsave(&smmu->cmdq.lock, flags);
-	ent.sync.msidata = ++smmu->sync_nr;
-	arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd(cmd, &ent);
-	arm_smmu_cmdq_insert_cmd(smmu, cmd);
+	if (smmu->prev_cmd_opcode == CMDQ_OP_CMD_SYNC) {
+		/*
+		 * Previous command is CMD_SYNC also, there is no need to add
+		 * one more. Just poll it.
+		 */
+		ent.sync.msidata = smmu->sync_nr;
+	} else {
+		ent.sync.msidata = ++smmu->sync_nr;
+		arm_smmu_cmdq_build_cmd(cmd, &ent);
+		arm_smmu_cmdq_insert_cmd(smmu, cmd);
+	}
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&smmu->cmdq.lock, flags);

 	return __arm_smmu_sync_poll_msi(smmu, ent.sync.msidata);
--
1.8.3