2019-05-28 20:10:26 +03:00
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
2008-07-02 17:53:13 +04:00
/ *
* Copyright 2 0 0 8 V i t a l y M a y a t s k i k h < v m a y a t s k @redhat.com>
* Copyright 2 0 0 2 A n d i K l e e n , S u S E L a b s .
*
* Functions t o c o p y f r o m a n d t o u s e r s p a c e .
* /
2005-04-17 02:20:36 +04:00
2023-08-06 17:59:56 +03:00
# include < l i n u x / e x p o r t . h >
2006-09-26 12:52:32 +04:00
# include < l i n u x / l i n k a g e . h >
x86: re-introduce support for ERMS copies for user space accesses
I tried to streamline our user memory copy code fairly aggressively in
commit adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory
copies"), in order to then be able to clean up the code and inline the
modern FSRM case in commit 577e6a7fd50d ("x86: inline the 'rep movs' in
user copies for the FSRM case").
We had reports [1] of that causing regressions earlier with blogbench,
but that turned out to be a horrible benchmark for that case, and not a
sufficient reason for re-instating "rep movsb" on older machines.
However, now Eric Dumazet reported [2] a regression in performance that
seems to be a rather more real benchmark, where due to the removal of
"rep movs" a TCP stream over a 100Gbps network no longer reaches line
speed.
And it turns out that with the simplified the calling convention for the
non-FSRM case in commit 427fda2c8a49 ("x86: improve on the non-rep
'copy_user' function"), re-introducing the ERMS case is actually fairly
simple.
Of course, that "fairly simple" is glossing over several missteps due to
having to fight our assembler alternative code. This code really wanted
to rewrite a conditional branch to have two different targets, but that
made objtool sufficiently unhappy that this instead just ended up doing
a choice between "jump to the unrolled loop, or use 'rep movsb'
directly".
Let's see if somebody finds a case where the kernel memory copies also
care (see commit 68674f94ffc9: "x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for
small memory copies"). But Eric does argue that the user copies are
special because networking tries to copy up to 32KB at a time, if
order-3 pages allocations are possible.
In-kernel memory copies are typically small, unless they are the special
"copy pages at a time" kind that still use "rep movs".
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202305041446.71d46724-yujie.liu@intel.com/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANn89iKUbyrJ=r2+_kK+sb2ZSSHifFZ7QkPLDpAtkJ8v4WUumA@mail.gmail.com/ [2]
Reported-and-tested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Fixes: adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory copies")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-05-26 22:34:20 +03:00
# include < a s m / c p u f e a t u r e s . h >
# include < a s m / a l t e r n a t i v e . h >
2012-04-20 23:19:51 +04:00
# include < a s m / a s m . h >
2006-09-26 12:52:39 +04:00
2005-04-17 02:20:36 +04:00
/ *
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
* rep_ m o v s _ a l t e r n a t i v e - m e m o r y c o p y w i t h e x c e p t i o n h a n d l i n g .
* This v e r s i o n i s f o r C P U s t h a t d o n ' t h a v e F S R M ( F a s t S h o r t R e p M o v s )
2008-07-02 17:53:13 +04:00
*
* Input :
2005-04-17 02:20:36 +04:00
* rdi d e s t i n a t i o n
* rsi s o u r c e
2023-04-16 05:31:34 +03:00
* rcx c o u n t
2005-04-17 02:20:36 +04:00
*
2008-07-02 17:53:13 +04:00
* Output :
2023-04-16 05:31:34 +03:00
* rcx u n c o p i e d b y t e s o r 0 i f s u c c e s s f u l .
*
* NOTE! T h e c a l l i n g c o n v e n t i o n i s v e r y i n t e n t i o n a l l y t h e s a m e a s
* for ' r e p m o v s ' , s o t h a t w e c a n r e w r i t e t h e f u n c t i o n c a l l w i t h
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
* just a p l a i n ' r e p m o v s ' o n m a c h i n e s t h a t h a v e F S R M . B u t t o m a k e
2023-08-30 17:03:15 +03:00
* it s i m p l e r f o r u s , w e c a n c l o b b e r r s i / r d i a n d r a x f r e e l y .
2005-04-17 02:20:36 +04:00
* /
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
SYM_ F U N C _ S T A R T ( r e p _ m o v s _ a l t e r n a t i v e )
cmpq $ 6 4 ,% r c x
x86: re-introduce support for ERMS copies for user space accesses
I tried to streamline our user memory copy code fairly aggressively in
commit adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory
copies"), in order to then be able to clean up the code and inline the
modern FSRM case in commit 577e6a7fd50d ("x86: inline the 'rep movs' in
user copies for the FSRM case").
We had reports [1] of that causing regressions earlier with blogbench,
but that turned out to be a horrible benchmark for that case, and not a
sufficient reason for re-instating "rep movsb" on older machines.
However, now Eric Dumazet reported [2] a regression in performance that
seems to be a rather more real benchmark, where due to the removal of
"rep movs" a TCP stream over a 100Gbps network no longer reaches line
speed.
And it turns out that with the simplified the calling convention for the
non-FSRM case in commit 427fda2c8a49 ("x86: improve on the non-rep
'copy_user' function"), re-introducing the ERMS case is actually fairly
simple.
Of course, that "fairly simple" is glossing over several missteps due to
having to fight our assembler alternative code. This code really wanted
to rewrite a conditional branch to have two different targets, but that
made objtool sufficiently unhappy that this instead just ended up doing
a choice between "jump to the unrolled loop, or use 'rep movsb'
directly".
Let's see if somebody finds a case where the kernel memory copies also
care (see commit 68674f94ffc9: "x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for
small memory copies"). But Eric does argue that the user copies are
special because networking tries to copy up to 32KB at a time, if
order-3 pages allocations are possible.
In-kernel memory copies are typically small, unless they are the special
"copy pages at a time" kind that still use "rep movs".
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202305041446.71d46724-yujie.liu@intel.com/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANn89iKUbyrJ=r2+_kK+sb2ZSSHifFZ7QkPLDpAtkJ8v4WUumA@mail.gmail.com/ [2]
Reported-and-tested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Fixes: adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory copies")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-05-26 22:34:20 +03:00
jae . L l a r g e
2006-02-03 23:51:02 +03:00
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
cmp $ 8 ,% e c x
jae . L w o r d
2006-02-03 23:51:02 +03:00
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
testl % e c x ,% e c x
je . L e x i t
2006-09-26 12:52:32 +04:00
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
.Lcopy_user_tail :
0 : movb ( % r s i ) ,% a l
1 : movb % a l ,( % r d i )
inc % r d i
inc % r s i
dec % r c x
jne . L c o p y _ u s e r _ t a i l
.Lexit :
2021-12-04 16:43:40 +03:00
RET
2019-03-01 17:24:33 +03:00
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
_ ASM_ E X T A B L E _ U A ( 0 b , . L e x i t )
_ ASM_ E X T A B L E _ U A ( 1 b , . L e x i t )
2021-12-23 23:07:01 +03:00
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
.p2align 4
.Lword :
2 : movq ( % r s i ) ,% r a x
3 : movq % r a x ,( % r d i )
addq $ 8 ,% r s i
addq $ 8 ,% r d i
sub $ 8 ,% e c x
je . L e x i t
cmp $ 8 ,% e c x
jae . L w o r d
jmp . L c o p y _ u s e r _ t a i l
2021-11-10 13:01:05 +03:00
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
_ ASM_ E X T A B L E _ U A ( 2 b , . L c o p y _ u s e r _ t a i l )
_ ASM_ E X T A B L E _ U A ( 3 b , . L c o p y _ u s e r _ t a i l )
2021-11-10 13:01:05 +03:00
x86: re-introduce support for ERMS copies for user space accesses
I tried to streamline our user memory copy code fairly aggressively in
commit adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory
copies"), in order to then be able to clean up the code and inline the
modern FSRM case in commit 577e6a7fd50d ("x86: inline the 'rep movs' in
user copies for the FSRM case").
We had reports [1] of that causing regressions earlier with blogbench,
but that turned out to be a horrible benchmark for that case, and not a
sufficient reason for re-instating "rep movsb" on older machines.
However, now Eric Dumazet reported [2] a regression in performance that
seems to be a rather more real benchmark, where due to the removal of
"rep movs" a TCP stream over a 100Gbps network no longer reaches line
speed.
And it turns out that with the simplified the calling convention for the
non-FSRM case in commit 427fda2c8a49 ("x86: improve on the non-rep
'copy_user' function"), re-introducing the ERMS case is actually fairly
simple.
Of course, that "fairly simple" is glossing over several missteps due to
having to fight our assembler alternative code. This code really wanted
to rewrite a conditional branch to have two different targets, but that
made objtool sufficiently unhappy that this instead just ended up doing
a choice between "jump to the unrolled loop, or use 'rep movsb'
directly".
Let's see if somebody finds a case where the kernel memory copies also
care (see commit 68674f94ffc9: "x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for
small memory copies"). But Eric does argue that the user copies are
special because networking tries to copy up to 32KB at a time, if
order-3 pages allocations are possible.
In-kernel memory copies are typically small, unless they are the special
"copy pages at a time" kind that still use "rep movs".
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202305041446.71d46724-yujie.liu@intel.com/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANn89iKUbyrJ=r2+_kK+sb2ZSSHifFZ7QkPLDpAtkJ8v4WUumA@mail.gmail.com/ [2]
Reported-and-tested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Fixes: adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory copies")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-05-26 22:34:20 +03:00
.Llarge :
2023-08-30 17:03:15 +03:00
0 : ALTERNATIVE " j m p . L l a r g e _ m o v s q " , " r e p m o v s b " , X 8 6 _ F E A T U R E _ E R M S
x86: re-introduce support for ERMS copies for user space accesses
I tried to streamline our user memory copy code fairly aggressively in
commit adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory
copies"), in order to then be able to clean up the code and inline the
modern FSRM case in commit 577e6a7fd50d ("x86: inline the 'rep movs' in
user copies for the FSRM case").
We had reports [1] of that causing regressions earlier with blogbench,
but that turned out to be a horrible benchmark for that case, and not a
sufficient reason for re-instating "rep movsb" on older machines.
However, now Eric Dumazet reported [2] a regression in performance that
seems to be a rather more real benchmark, where due to the removal of
"rep movs" a TCP stream over a 100Gbps network no longer reaches line
speed.
And it turns out that with the simplified the calling convention for the
non-FSRM case in commit 427fda2c8a49 ("x86: improve on the non-rep
'copy_user' function"), re-introducing the ERMS case is actually fairly
simple.
Of course, that "fairly simple" is glossing over several missteps due to
having to fight our assembler alternative code. This code really wanted
to rewrite a conditional branch to have two different targets, but that
made objtool sufficiently unhappy that this instead just ended up doing
a choice between "jump to the unrolled loop, or use 'rep movsb'
directly".
Let's see if somebody finds a case where the kernel memory copies also
care (see commit 68674f94ffc9: "x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for
small memory copies"). But Eric does argue that the user copies are
special because networking tries to copy up to 32KB at a time, if
order-3 pages allocations are possible.
In-kernel memory copies are typically small, unless they are the special
"copy pages at a time" kind that still use "rep movs".
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202305041446.71d46724-yujie.liu@intel.com/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANn89iKUbyrJ=r2+_kK+sb2ZSSHifFZ7QkPLDpAtkJ8v4WUumA@mail.gmail.com/ [2]
Reported-and-tested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Fixes: adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory copies")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-05-26 22:34:20 +03:00
1 : RET
2023-08-30 17:03:15 +03:00
_ ASM_ E X T A B L E _ U A ( 0 b , 1 b )
x86: re-introduce support for ERMS copies for user space accesses
I tried to streamline our user memory copy code fairly aggressively in
commit adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory
copies"), in order to then be able to clean up the code and inline the
modern FSRM case in commit 577e6a7fd50d ("x86: inline the 'rep movs' in
user copies for the FSRM case").
We had reports [1] of that causing regressions earlier with blogbench,
but that turned out to be a horrible benchmark for that case, and not a
sufficient reason for re-instating "rep movsb" on older machines.
However, now Eric Dumazet reported [2] a regression in performance that
seems to be a rather more real benchmark, where due to the removal of
"rep movs" a TCP stream over a 100Gbps network no longer reaches line
speed.
And it turns out that with the simplified the calling convention for the
non-FSRM case in commit 427fda2c8a49 ("x86: improve on the non-rep
'copy_user' function"), re-introducing the ERMS case is actually fairly
simple.
Of course, that "fairly simple" is glossing over several missteps due to
having to fight our assembler alternative code. This code really wanted
to rewrite a conditional branch to have two different targets, but that
made objtool sufficiently unhappy that this instead just ended up doing
a choice between "jump to the unrolled loop, or use 'rep movsb'
directly".
Let's see if somebody finds a case where the kernel memory copies also
care (see commit 68674f94ffc9: "x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for
small memory copies"). But Eric does argue that the user copies are
special because networking tries to copy up to 32KB at a time, if
order-3 pages allocations are possible.
In-kernel memory copies are typically small, unless they are the special
"copy pages at a time" kind that still use "rep movs".
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202305041446.71d46724-yujie.liu@intel.com/ [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CANn89iKUbyrJ=r2+_kK+sb2ZSSHifFZ7QkPLDpAtkJ8v4WUumA@mail.gmail.com/ [2]
Reported-and-tested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Fixes: adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory copies")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-05-26 22:34:20 +03:00
2023-08-30 17:03:15 +03:00
.Llarge_movsq :
movq % r c x ,% r a x
shrq $ 3 ,% r c x
andl $ 7 ,% e a x
0 : rep m o v s q
movl % e a x ,% e c x
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
testl % e c x ,% e c x
jne . L c o p y _ u s e r _ t a i l
RET
2023-08-30 17:03:15 +03:00
1 : leaq ( % r a x ,% r c x ,8 ) ,% r c x
jmp . L c o p y _ u s e r _ t a i l
_ ASM_ E X T A B L E _ U A ( 0 b , 1 b )
x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function
The old 'copy_user_generic_unrolled' function was oddly implemented for
largely historical reasons: it had been largely based on the uncached
copy case, which has some other concerns.
For example, the __copy_user_nocache() function uses 'movnti' for the
destination stores, and those want the destination to be aligned. In
contrast, the regular copy function doesn't really care, and trying to
align things only complicates matters.
Also, like the clear_user function, the copy function had some odd
handling of the repeat counts, complicating the exception handling for
no really good reason. So as with clear_user, just write it to keep all
the byte counts in the %rcx register, exactly like the 'rep movs'
functionality that this replaces.
Unlike a real 'rep movs', we do allow for this to trash a few temporary
registers to not have to unnecessarily save/restore registers on the
stack.
And like the clearing case, rename this to what it now clearly is:
'rep_movs_alternative', and make it one coherent function, so that it
shows up as such in profiles (instead of the odd split between
"copy_user_generic_unrolled" and "copy_user_short_string", the latter of
which was not about strings at all, and which was shared with the
uncached case).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2023-04-17 04:23:06 +03:00
SYM_ F U N C _ E N D ( r e p _ m o v s _ a l t e r n a t i v e )
EXPORT_ S Y M B O L ( r e p _ m o v s _ a l t e r n a t i v e )
