From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH] padata: make the sequence counter an atomic_t Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:26:44 +0800 Message-ID: <20131025092644.GA20145@gondor.apana.org.au> References: <1380721245-5215-1-git-send-email-mathias.krause@secunet.com> <20131008120824.GN7660@secunet.com> <526A29E0.8070204@secunet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Steffen Klassert , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org To: Mathias Krause Return-path: Received: from ringil.hengli.com.au ([178.18.16.133]:50976 "EHLO fornost.hengli.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751377Ab3JYJ0r (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Oct 2013 05:26:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <526A29E0.8070204@secunet.com> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 10:20:48AM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote: > On 08.10.2013 14:08, Steffen Klassert wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 03:40:45PM +0200, Mathias Krause wrote: > >> Using a spinlock to atomically increase a counter sounds wrong -- we've > >> atomic_t for this! > >> > >> Also move 'seq_nr' to a different cache line than 'lock' to reduce cache > >> line trashing. This has the nice side effect of decreasing the size of > >> struct parallel_data from 192 to 128 bytes for a x86-64 build, e.g. > >> occupying only two instead of three cache lines. > >> > >> Those changes results in a 5% performance increase on an IPsec test run > >> using pcrypt. > >> > >> Btw. the seq_lock spinlock was never explicitly initialized -- one more > >> reason to get rid of it. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause > > > > Acked-by: Steffen Klassert > > > > Herbert can you take this one? > > Ping, Herbert? Anything wrong with the patch? Sorry I don't seem to have this patch in my mail box. Can you resend it please? Thanks! -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt