Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-25 Thread John Garry
On 24/07/2019 15:48, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 03:25:07PM +0100, John Garry wrote: On 24/07/2019 13:20, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:58:26AM +0100, John Garry wrote: On 11/07/2019 18:19, Will Deacon wrote: This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-24 Thread Will Deacon
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 03:25:07PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 24/07/2019 13:20, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:58:26AM +0100, John Garry wrote: > > > On 11/07/2019 18:19, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: > > > > > >

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-24 Thread John Garry
On 24/07/2019 13:20, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:58:26AM +0100, John Garry wrote: On 11/07/2019 18:19, Will Deacon wrote: This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190611134603.4253-1-will.dea...@arm.com But this time, it

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-24 Thread Will Deacon
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 09:55:39AM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:58 PM Will Deacon wrote: > > This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: > > > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190611134603.4253-1-will.dea...@arm.com > > > > But this time, it l

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-24 Thread Will Deacon
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:58:26AM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 11/07/2019 18:19, Will Deacon wrote: > > This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: > > > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190611134603.4253-1-will.dea...@arm.com > > > > But this time, it looks like it might a

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-24 Thread John Garry
On 11/07/2019 18:19, Will Deacon wrote: Hi everyone, This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190611134603.4253-1-will.dea...@arm.com But this time, it looks like it might actually be worthwhile according to my perf profiles, where __iommu

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-18 Thread Ganapatrao Kulkarni
Hi Will, On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:58 PM Will Deacon wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190611134603.4253-1-will.dea...@arm.com > > But this time, it looks like it might actually be worthwhile according

[RFC PATCH v2 00/19] Try to reduce lock contention on the SMMUv3 command queue

2019-07-11 Thread Will Deacon
Hi everyone, This is a significant rework of the RFC I previously posted here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190611134603.4253-1-will.dea...@arm.com But this time, it looks like it might actually be worthwhile according to my perf profiles, where __iommu_unmap() falls a long way down the profile