Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Improve cmdq lock efficiency
From: John Garry <hidden>
Date: 2020-09-21 14:01:05
Also in:
linux-iommu, lkml
From: John Garry <hidden>
Date: 2020-09-21 14:01:05
Also in:
linux-iommu, lkml
On 21/09/2020 14:43, Will Deacon wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 09:54:20PM +0800, John Garry wrote:quoted
As mentioned in [0], the CPU may consume many cycles processing arm_smmu_cmdq_issue_cmdlist(). One issue we find is the cmpxchg() loop to get space on the queue takes a lot of time once we start getting many CPUs contending - from experiment, for 64 CPUs contending the cmdq, success rate is ~ 1 in 12, which is poor, but not totally awful. This series removes that cmpxchg() and replaces with an atomic_add, same as how the actual cmdq deals with maintaining the prod pointer.> I'm still not a fan of this.
:(
Could you try to adapt the hacks I sent before, please? I know they weren't quite right (I have no hardware to test on), but the basic idea is to fall back to a spinlock if the cmpxchg() fails. The queueing in the spinlock implementation should avoid the contention.
OK, so if you're asking me to try this again, then I can do that, and see what it gives us. John _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel