[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aEaP-A21IB4ufbZT@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 09:40:40 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
"Jason A . Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] lib/crc: improve how arch-optimized code is
integrated
* Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org> wrote:
> This series is also available at:
>
> git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiggers/linux.git lib-crc-arch-v2
>
> This series improves how lib/crc supports arch-optimized code. First,
> instead of the arch-optimized CRC code being in arch/$(SRCARCH)/lib/, it
> will now be in lib/crc/$(SRCARCH)/. Second, the API functions (e.g.
> crc32c()), arch-optimized functions (e.g. crc32c_arch()), and generic
> functions (e.g. crc32c_base()) will now be part of a single module for
> each CRC type, allowing better inlining and dead code elimination. The
> second change is made possible by the first.
>
> As an example, consider CONFIG_CRC32=m on x86. We'll now have just
> crc32.ko instead of both crc32-x86.ko and crc32.ko. The two modules
> were already coupled together and always both got loaded together via
> direct symbol dependency, so the separation provided no benefit.
>
> Note: later I'd like to apply the same design to lib/crypto/ too, where
> often the API functions are out-of-line so this will work even better.
> In those cases, for each algorithm we currently have 3 modules all
> coupled together, e.g. libsha256.ko, libsha256-generic.ko, and
> sha256-x86.ko. We should have just one, inline things properly, and
> rely on the compiler's dead code elimination to decide the inclusion of
> the generic code instead of manually setting it via kconfig.
>
> Having arch-specific code outside arch/ was somewhat controversial when
> Zinc proposed it back in 2018. But I don't think the concerns are
> warranted. It's better from a technical perspective, as it enables the
> improvements mentioned above. This model is already successfully used
> in other places in the kernel such as lib/raid6/. The community of each
> architecture still remains free to work on the code, even if it's not in
> arch/. At the time there was also a desire to put the library code in
> the same files as the old-school crypto API, but that was a mistake; now
> that the library is separate, that's no longer a constraint either.
>
> Changed in v2:
> - Fixed build warning on architectures without any optimized CRC code
> - Fixed build warning in sparc/crc32.h by removing pr_fmt
> - Moved fallback definitions of crc32*_arch back into arch files
> - Remove ARCH_HAS_CRC* symbols at end of series instead of beginning,
> so that they're not removed until they're no longer being selected
> - Slightly improved some commit messages
> - Rebased onto other pending lib/crc changes
>
> Eric Biggers (12):
> lib/crc: move files into lib/crc/
> lib/crc: prepare for arch-optimized code in subdirs of lib/crc/
> lib/crc/arm: migrate arm-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/arm64: migrate arm64-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/loongarch: migrate loongarch-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/mips: migrate mips-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/powerpc: migrate powerpc-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/riscv: migrate riscv-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/s390: migrate s390-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/sparc: migrate sparc-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc/x86: migrate x86-optimized CRC code into lib/crc/
> lib/crc: remove ARCH_HAS_* kconfig symbols
For the movement of the x86 bits:
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> rename {arch/s390/lib => lib/crc/s390}/crc32be-vx.c (100%)
> rename {arch/s390/lib => lib/crc/s390}/crc32le-vx.c (100%)
> rename arch/sparc/lib/crc32.c => lib/crc/sparc/crc32.h (60%)
> rename {arch/sparc/lib => lib/crc/sparc}/crc32c_asm.S (100%)
> create mode 100644 lib/crc/tests/Makefile
> rename lib/{ => crc}/tests/crc_kunit.c (100%)
> rename {arch/x86/lib => lib/crc/x86}/crc-pclmul-consts.h (100%)
> rename {arch/x86/lib => lib/crc/x86}/crc-pclmul-template.S (100%)
> rename {arch/x86/lib => lib/crc/x86}/crc-pclmul-template.h (100%)
> rename arch/x86/lib/crc-t10dif.c => lib/crc/x86/crc-t10dif.h (56%)
> rename {arch/x86/lib => lib/crc/x86}/crc16-msb-pclmul.S (100%)
> rename {arch/x86/lib => lib/crc/x86}/crc32-pclmul.S (100%)
One small namespace suggestion: wouldn't it be better to move the arch
support code to lib/crc/arch/, instead of lib/crc/? That way any
generic code will stand out better and architecture directories don't
crowd out what is supposed to be generic code.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists