Re: cleanup the RAID6 P/Q library v3
"H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-raid,dev.linux.lists.loongarch,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-crypto,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-s390,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On June 29, 2026 5:21:52 AM PDT, Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, Jun 26, 2026 at 05:52:18PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 2026-05-19 01:24, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> > >> > raid6: rework registration of optimized algorithms >> > >> > - avx2 instead of avx512 is probably the right thing for no >> > benchmarking, but if it was intentional (it wasn't), that should >> > be document. So I'll just switch back to the previous version to >> > keep the state of the art >> >> It is unlikely to be the right thing *going forward*, though. >> >> The very unfortunate performance inversion is likely model-specific. It is one >> of those things where you largely would have to have a list of quirks :( > >Note that the default is still to benchmark the implementations. >This is just about the case where the user explicitly disabled that >benchmark-based selection. > The real issue though is that the benchmarking isn't really helpful, either. It has to do with power across the whole chip, so it perversely enough depends on what *else* is going on...