[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1345642009.15245.0.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:26:49 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>, <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86_64: Define 128-bit memory-mapped I/O operations
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 20:52 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[...]
> I haven't seen the patch being discussed, or the rationale for it. But
> I doubt it makes sense to do 128-bit MMIO and expect any kind of
> atomicity things anyway, and I very much doubt that using SSE would
> make all that much sense. What's the background, and why would you
> want to do this crap?
It's <1345598804.2659.78.camel@...-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com>.
When updating a TX DMA ring pointer in sfc, we can push the first new
descriptor at the same time, so that for a linear packet only one DMA
read is then required before the packet goes out on the wire. Currently
this requires 2-4 MMIO writes (each a separate PCIe transactions),
depending on the host word size. There is a measurable reduction in
latency if we can reduce it to 1 PCIe transaction. (But as previously
discussed, write-combining isn't suitable for this.)
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists