Re: Triple-parity raid6

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/11/2011 12:31 PM, David Brown wrote:

What has changed over the years is that there is no longer such a need
for manual assembly code to get optimal speed out of the cpu. While

Hmmm ... I've done studies on this using an incredibly simple function (Riemann Zeta Function c.f. http://scalability.org/?p=470 ). The short version is that hand optimized SSE2 is ~4x faster (for this case) than best optimization of high level code. Hand optimized assembler is even better.

writing such assembly is fun, it is time-consuming to write and hard to
maintain, especially for code that must run on so many different platforms.

Yes, it is generally hard to write and maintain. But it you can get the rest of the language semantics out of the way. If you look at the tests that Linux does when it starts up, you can see a fairly wide distribution in the performance.

raid5: using function: generic_sse (13356.000 MB/sec)
raid6: int64x1   3507 MB/s
raid6: int64x2   3886 MB/s
raid6: int64x4   3257 MB/s
raid6: int64x8   3054 MB/s
raid6: sse2x1    8347 MB/s
raid6: sse2x2    9695 MB/s
raid6: sse2x4   10972 MB/s

Some of these are hand coded assembly. See ${KERNEL_SOURCE}/drivers/md/raid6sse2.c and look at the raid6_sse24_gen_syndrome code.

Really, to get the best performance out of the system, requires a fairly deep understanding of how the processor/memory system operates. These functions do use the SSE registers, but we can have only so many SSE operations in flight at once. These processors can generally have quite a few simultaneous operations in flight at once, so a knowledge about that, and the mix of operations, and how the interact with the instruction scheduler in the hardware, is fairly essential to getting good performance.


We are interested in working on this capability (and more generic
capability) as well.

Is anyone in particular starting to design/code this? Please let me know.


Well, I am currently trying to write up some of the maths - I started
the thread because I had been playing around with the maths, and thought
it should work. I made a brief stab at writing a
"raid7_int$#_gen_syndrome()" function, but I haven't done any testing
with it (or even tried to compile it) - first I want to be sure of the
algorithms.

I've been coding various bits as "pseudocode" using Octave. Makes checking with the built in Galios functions pretty easy.

I haven't looked at the math behind the triple parity syndrome calc yet, though I'd imagine someone has, and can write it down. If someone hasn't done that yet, its a good first step. Then we can code the simple version from there with test drivers/cases, and then start optimizing the implementation.


--
Joseph Landman, Ph.D
Founder and CEO
Scalable Informatics, Inc.
email: landman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
web  : http://scalableinformatics.com
       http://scalableinformatics.com/sicluster
phone: +1 734 786 8423 x121
fax  : +1 866 888 3112
cell : +1 734 612 4615
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux