On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 6:41 PM, David Laight <david.lai...@aculab.com> wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann
>> Sent: 23 February 2018 15:37
>> 32-bit architectures generally cannot use writeq(), so we now get a build
>> failure for the lpfc driver:
>> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c: In function 'lpfc_sli4_wq_put':
>> drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c:145:4: error: implicit declaration of function 
>> 'writeq'; did you mean
>> 'writeb'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> Another problem here is that writing out actual data (unlike accessing
>> mmio registers) means we must write the data with the same endianess
>> that we have read from memory, but writeq() will perform byte swaps
>> and add barriers inbetween accesses as we do for registers.
>> Using memcpy_toio() should do the right thing here, using register
>> sized stores with correct endianess conversion and barriers (i.e. none),
>> but on some architectures might fall back to byte-size access.
> ...
> Have you looked at the performance impact of this on x86?
> Last time I looked memcpy_toio() aliased directly to memcpy().
> memcpy() is run-time patched between several different algorithms.
> On recent Intel cpus memcpy() is implemented as 'rep movsb' relying
> on the hardware to DTRT.
> For uncached accesses (typical for io) the 'RT' has to be byte transfers.
> So instead of the 8 byte transfers (on 64 bit) you get single bytes.
> This won't be what is intended!
> memcpy_toio() should probably use 'rep movsd' for the bulk of the transfer.

Maybe I'm wrong but it uses movsq on 64-bit and movsl on 32-bit.

The side-effect I referred previously is about tails, i.e. unaligned
bytes are transferred in portions
  7 on 64-bit will be  4 + 2 + 1,
  5 = 4 + 1

Similar way on 32-bit.

With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Reply via email to