On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 04:52:30PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> As it turns out, checking the TIF_NEED_RESCHED flag after each
> iteration results in a significant performance regression (~10%)
> when running fast algorithms (i.e., ones that use special instructions
> and operate in the < 4
On 3 August 2018 at 10:17, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 09:10:08AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> But I think it's too late now to take this into v4.18. Could you
>> please queue this (and my other two pending arm64/aes-gcm patches, if
>> possible) for v4.19 instead?
>
> OK I'll
On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 09:10:08AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> But I think it's too late now to take this into v4.18. Could you
> please queue this (and my other two pending arm64/aes-gcm patches, if
> possible) for v4.19 instead?
OK I'll do that.
Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu
Home Page:
On 3 August 2018 at 08:14, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 04:52:30PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> As it turns out, checking the TIF_NEED_RESCHED flag after each
>> iteration results in a significant performance regression (~10%)
>> when running fast algorithms (i.e., ones that use
On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 04:52:30PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> As it turns out, checking the TIF_NEED_RESCHED flag after each
> iteration results in a significant performance regression (~10%)
> when running fast algorithms (i.e., ones that use special instructions
> and operate in the < 4
As it turns out, checking the TIF_NEED_RESCHED flag after each
iteration results in a significant performance regression (~10%)
when running fast algorithms (i.e., ones that use special instructions
and operate in the < 4 cycles per byte range) on in-order cores with
comparatively slow memory
