Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760392AbYBRSyF (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:54:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759171AbYBRSxv (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:53:51 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71]:15828 "EHLO sj-iport-2.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759078AbYBRSxu (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:53:50 -0500 To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Andi Kleen , Frans Pop , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Unable to continue testing of 2.6.25 X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information References: <200802171025.30590.elendil@planet.nl> <20080217124650.576990ce@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20080218085018.05f3190a@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20080218171159.GA24090@basil.nowhere.org> <20080218093215.5cf611a8@laptopd505.fenrus.org> From: Roland Dreier Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:53:42 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20080218093215.5cf611a8@laptopd505.fenrus.org> (Arjan van de Ven's message of "Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:32:15 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) XEmacs/21.4.21 (linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Feb 2008 18:53:43.0375 (UTC) FILETIME=[95620DF0:01C8725F] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=rdreier@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1289 Lines: 24 > I've yet to see a user who wants WC. Lets face it, WC *sucks*. This is why > the folks who care about performance (the graphics guys) stopped using it. > WC is slow, and on modern cpus leads to really bad performance. I'm really > half tempted to just ignore WC entirely and suggest that we don't even implement > it in the kernel. Yes it's really that bad. I know of one case at least where WC is very useful. Some InfiniBand adapters allow small messages to be written directly into the adapter's PCI space BAR to lower latency (having the CPU write the message avoids doing something like build descriptor, ring doorbell register on adapter, adapter DMA message out of CPU memory). And mapping the PCI space with WC is a pretty big win -- for example for mlx4 hardware it gets MPI latency from ~1.8 usec to ~1.3 usec which is a big deal. I think most real users of mlx4 hardware are using a hacky out-of-tree patch to allow using PAT to set WC. AFAIK mapping PCI memory WB is not allowed, so WC is really our only choice. - R. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/