From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: puranjay12@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: implement raw_smp_processor_id() using thread_info
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 15:42:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240501154236.10236-1-puranjay@kernel.org> (raw)
ARM64 defines THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK which means the cpu id can be found
from current_thread_info()->cpu.
Implement raw_smp_processor_id() using the above. This decreases the
number of emitted instructions like in the following example:
Dump of assembler code for function bpf_get_smp_processor_id:
0xffff8000802cd608 <+0>: nop
0xffff8000802cd60c <+4>: nop
0xffff8000802cd610 <+8>: adrp x0, 0xffff800082138000
0xffff8000802cd614 <+12>: mrs x1, tpidr_el1
0xffff8000802cd618 <+16>: add x0, x0, #0x8
0xffff8000802cd61c <+20>: ldrsw x0, [x0, x1]
0xffff8000802cd620 <+24>: ret
After this patch:
Dump of assembler code for function bpf_get_smp_processor_id:
0xffff8000802c9130 <+0>: nop
0xffff8000802c9134 <+4>: nop
0xffff8000802c9138 <+8>: mrs x0, sp_el0
0xffff8000802c913c <+12>: ldr w0, [x0, #24]
0xffff8000802c9140 <+16>: ret
A microbenchmark[1] was built to measure the performance improvement
provided by this change. It calls the following function given number of
times and finds the runtime overhead:
static noinline int get_cpu_id(void)
{
return smp_processor_id();
}
Run the benchmark like:
modprobe smp_processor_id nr_function_calls=1000000000
+--------------------------+------------------------+
| | Number of Calls | Time taken |
+--------+-----------------+------------------------+
| Before | 1000000000 | 1602888401ns |
+--------+-----------------+------------------------+
| After | 1000000000 | 1206212658ns |
+--------+-----------------+------------------------+
| Difference (decrease) | 396675743ns (24.74%) |
+---------------------------------------------------+
This improvement is in this very specific microbenchmark but it proves
the point.
The percpu variable cpu_number is left as it is because it is used in
set_smp_ipi_range()
[1] https://github.com/puranjaymohan/linux/commit/77d3fdd
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h | 8 ++------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
index efb13112b408..88fd2ab805ec 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
@@ -34,13 +34,9 @@
DECLARE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(int, cpu_number);
/*
- * We don't use this_cpu_read(cpu_number) as that has implicit writes to
- * preempt_count, and associated (compiler) barriers, that we'd like to avoid
- * the expense of. If we're preemptible, the value can be stale at use anyway.
- * And we can't use this_cpu_ptr() either, as that winds up recursing back
- * here under CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT=y.
+ * This relies on THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK, but arm64 defines that unconditionally.
*/
-#define raw_smp_processor_id() (*raw_cpu_ptr(&cpu_number))
+#define raw_smp_processor_id() (current_thread_info()->cpu)
/*
* Logical CPU mapping.
--
2.40.1
next reply other threads:[~2024-05-01 15:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-01 15:42 Puranjay Mohan [this message]
2024-05-01 16:23 ` [PATCH] arm64: implement raw_smp_processor_id() using thread_info Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
2024-05-01 16:41 ` Mark Rutland
2024-05-01 17:12 ` Puranjay Mohan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240501154236.10236-1-puranjay@kernel.org \
--to=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=puranjay12@gmail.com \
--cc=sumit.garg@linaro.org \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).