[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1351998d-4fd7-dffb-c1fa-a0b1ca759123@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 11:45:58 +0100
From: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To: Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@...edance.com>,
Ethan Zhao <haifeng.zhao@...ux.intel.com>, <joro@...tes.org>,
<will@...nel.org>
CC: <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iommu/iova: Optimize alloc_iova with rbtree_augmented
On 26/08/2022 11:28, Peng Zhang wrote:
>
>> Though only 3-4 drivers use alloc_iova() directly, in my understanding
>>
>> your test has simulated the worst case, rcache doesn't work at all,
>>
>> "alloc_iova" +“remove_iova” number looks great for worst case.
>
> There is another case, when the size to allocate greater to 2^5, even if
> alloc_iova_fast() is used, alloc_iova() will always be called because
> the maximum iova size that rcache supports to allocate is 32.
> IOVA_RANGE_CACHE_MAX_SIZE specifies the maximum size.
>
If you really have a performance issue with alloc_iova_fast() ->
alloc_iova() then I suggest that you consider trying to use
dma_opt_mapping_size() to teach the DMA engine driver to not create
requests whose overall size exceeds to the rcache limit.
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists