Will Deacon wrote:
[adding Cavium folk and Timur] On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 05:32:23PM +0800, Ganesh Mahendran wrote:Reverts commit 97303480753e ("arm64: Increase the max granular size"). The commit 97303480753e ("arm64: Increase the max granular size") will degrade system performente in some cpus. We test wifi network throughput with iperf on Qualcomm msm8996 CPU: ---------------- run on host: # iperf -s run on device: # iperf -c <device-ip-addr> -t 100 -i 1 ---------------- Test result: ---------------- with commit 97303480753e ("arm64: Increase the max granular size"): 172MBits/sec without commit 97303480753e ("arm64: Increase the max granular size"): 230MBits/sec ---------------- Some module like slab/net will use the L1_CACHE_SHIFT, so if we do not set the parameter correctly, it may affect the system performance. So revert the commit.Unfortunately, the original patch is required to support the 128-byte L1 cache lines of Cavium ThunderX, so we can't simply revert it like this. Similarly, the desire for a single, multiplatform kernel image prevents us from reasonably fixing this at compile time to anything other than the expected maximum value. Furthermore, Timur previously said that the change is also required "on our [Qualcomm] silicon", but I'm not sure if this is msm9886 or not: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAOZdJXUiRMAguDV+HEJqPg57MyBNqEcTyaH+ya=U93NHb-pdJA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I was talking about our server part, the QDF2432. At the time, I wasn't allowed to mention it by name.
You could look into making ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN a runtime value, but that looks like an uphill struggle to me. Alternatively, we could only warn if the CWG is bigger than L1_CACHE_BYTES *and* we have a non-coherent DMA master, but that doesn't solve any performance issues from having things like locks sharing cachelines, not that I think we ever got any data on that (afaik, we don't pad locks to cacheline boundaries anyway). I'm also not sure what it would mean for PCI NoSnoop transactions.
Our internal version of this patch made it a Kconfig option. Perhaps that would at least be an improvement over just reverting it? We already have to have our own defconfig for the QDF2432.
-- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html