Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: x86/crc32c-intel - Don't match some Zhaoxin CPUs
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
CC:     <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
        <tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <bp@alien8.de>,
        <x86@kernel.org>, <hpa@zytor.com>, <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <TimGuo-oc@zhaoxin.com>,
        <CooperYan@zhaoxin.com>, <QiyuanWang@zhaoxin.com>,
        <HerryYang@zhaoxin.com>, <CobeChen@zhaoxin.com>,
        <SilviaZhao@zhaoxin.com>
References: <1607686144-2604-1-git-send-email-TonyWWang-oc@zhaoxin.com>
 <X9Ov3RWDpUik7gXo@sol.localdomain>
 <1f8d17bf-c1d9-6496-d2f8-5773633011fb@zhaoxin.com>
 <X9fN7mOMdn1Dxn63@sol.localdomain>
From:   Tony W Wang-oc <TonyWWang-oc@zhaoxin.com>
Message-ID: <a95984ea-7451-78fe-88c5-b81f633fecdf@zhaoxin.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Dec 2020 10:15:29 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <X9fN7mOMdn1Dxn63@sol.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 15/12/2020 04:41, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 10:28:19AM +0800, Tony W Wang-oc wrote:
>> On 12/12/2020 01:43, Eric Biggers wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 07:29:04PM +0800, Tony W Wang-oc wrote:
>>>> The driver crc32c-intel match CPUs supporting X86_FEATURE_XMM4_2.
>>>> On platforms with Zhaoxin CPUs supporting this X86 feature, When
>>>> crc32c-intel and crc32c-generic are both registered, system will
>>>> use crc32c-intel because its .cra_priority is greater than
>>>> crc32c-generic. This case expect to use crc32c-generic driver for
>>>> some Zhaoxin CPUs to get performance gain, So remove these Zhaoxin
>>>> CPUs support from crc32c-intel.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tony W Wang-oc <TonyWWang-oc@zhaoxin.com>
>>>
>>> Does this mean that the performance of the crc32c instruction on those CPUs is
>>> actually slower than a regular C implementation?  That's very weird.
>>>
>>
>> From the lmbench3 Create and Delete file test on those chips, I think yes.
>>
> 
> Did you try measuring the performance of the hashing itself, and not some
> higher-level filesystem operations?
> 

Yes. Was testing on these Zhaoxin CPUs, the result is that with the same
input value the generic C implementation takes fewer time than the
crc32c instruction implementation.

Sincerely
Tony