Re: another pmem variant V2

[Ingo Molnar]

* Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 03:11:36PM +0000, Elliott, Robert (Server Storage) wrote:
> > Attr	Copy		Read IOPS		Write IOPS
> > ====	====		=========		==========
> > UC	memcpy		36 K			22 K
> > UC	NT rd,wr	513 K			326 K
> > 
> > WB	memcpy		3.4 M			2.5 M
> > WB	NT rd,wr	3.3 M			3.5 M
> > 
> > WC	memcpy		776 K			3.5 M
> > WC	NT rd,wr	3.0 M			3.9 M
> > 
> > WT	memcpy		2.1 M			22 K
> > WT	NT rd,wr	3.3 M			2.1 M
> > 
> > a few other variations yielded the peak numbers:
> > WC	NT rd only	3.2 M			4.1 M
> > WC	NT wr only	712 K			4.6 M
> > WT	NT wr only	2.6 M			4.0 M
> > 
> > There are lots of tuning considerations for those memcpy 
> > functions - how far to unroll the loop, whether to
> > include PRFETCHNTA instructions, etc.
> 
> Looks like we should aÑm for WC + NT would be a good start.
> 
> Can you prepare a patch to add your NT memcpy variants and
> a second one to use them in the pmem driver?

So we already have NT memcpy variants, see the copy_*_user_*_nocache() 
primitives in arch/x86/. They could be used almost straight away for 
kernel memory as well, as kernel buffers will not fault.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/