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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YVHVlzvu58wJlA0t@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 27 Sep 2021 15:30:47 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     Cai Huoqing <caihuoqing@...du.com>,
        Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>,
        Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/irdma: Use dma_alloc_coherent() instead of
 kmalloc/dma_map_single()

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 09:02:35AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> This I'm not sure about, I see lots of calls to dma_sync_single_* for
> this memory and it is not unconditionally true that using coherent
> memory is better than doing the cache flushes. It depends very much
> on the access pattern.
> 
> At the very least if you convert to coherent memory I expect to see
> the sync's removed too..

In general coherent memory actually is worse for not cache coherent
architectures when you hav chance, an should mkae no difference for
cache coherent ones.  So I'd like to see numbers here instead of a
claim.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ